ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2014
The timing of introduction of pharmaceutical innovations in seven European countries.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS AND
objectivesDifferences in the performance of medical care may be due to variation in the introduction and diffusion of medical innovations. The objective of this paper is to compare seven European countries (United Kingdom, the Netherlands, West Germany, France, Spain, Estonia and Sweden) with regard to the year of introduction of six specific pharmaceutical innovations (antiretroviral drugs, cimetidine, tamoxifen, cisplatin, oxalaplatin and cyclosporin) that may have had important population health impacts.
methodsWe collected information on introduction and further diffusion of drugs using searches in the national and international literature, and questionnaires to national informants. We combined various sources of information, both official years of registration and other indicators of introduction (clinical trials, guidelines, evaluation reports, sales statistics). RESULTS AND
conclusionsThe total length of the period between first and last introduction varied between 8 years for antiretroviral drugs and 22 years for cisplatin. Introduction in Estonia was generally delayed until the 1990s. The average time lags were smallest in France (2.2 years), United Kingdom (2.8 years) and the Netherlands (3.5 years). Similar rank orders were seen for year of registration suggesting that introduction lags are not only explained by differences in the process of registration. We discuss possible reasons for these between-country differences and implications for the evaluation of medical care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.