Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26148859›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2015

Illicit Internet availability of drugs subject to recall and patient safety consequences.

Tim K Mackey, Phyo Aung, Bryan A Liang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Illicit Online Pharmacies: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Developing a framework regarding a complex risk based methodology in the evaluation of hazards associated with medicinal products sourced via the internet.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tim K MackeyDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, San Diego, CA, USA. tmackey@ucsd.edu.
Phyo AungSkaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Bryan A LiangGlobal Health Policy Institute, 8950 Villa La Jolla Drive, Suite #A204, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPermanently recalled drugs are a public health concern if they remain accessible in violation of applicable regulation. Illicit online pharmacies act as an alternative form of access and have been associated with the sale to patients of counterfeit/falsified/fraudulent/substandard drugs. We wished to determine if permanently recalled and significantly restricted drugs were illegally marketed for sale online.

objectiveThe study was conducted in two phases with two objectives. The first phase attempted to identify drugs subject to permanent recall in certain major pharmaceutical markets as well as those listed as recalled or significantly restricted by the United Nations. We also examined the market authorization status of identified drugs in China and India. The second phase used structured searches on the Internet to determine if identified drugs were marketed for sale online.

settingThe World Wide Web.

methodAfter identification of permanently recalled and restricted drugs we conducted Internet searches for illegal "no prescription" marketing events. We assessed the form of marketing, whether a site offered direct-to-patient sale, use of social media marketing, and the site's compliance status with external monitoring bodies. MAIN OUTCOME: Number of recalled drugs marketed as available for purchase on the Internet.

resultsWe identified 16 class I equivalent permanently recalled or restricted drugs, 56.3 % (n = 9) of which maintained market authorization in either China or India. Half (n = 8) were marketed for sale online without a prescription direct-to-patient. Use of social media marketing was mixed, with only 18.8 % (n = 3) of recalled drugs having a presence on Facebook, though 50.0 % (n = 8) had content on Twitter. We also found the majority (68.8 %, n = 11) were available and marketed for sale by vendors on the wholesale/business-to-business website alibaba.com primarily as active pharmaceutical ingredient.

conclusionDespite efforts in several countries to restrict access to these drugs or permanently remove them from the market, our study indicates that various sources actively market recalled drugs for sale online. Drug regulators, public health agencies, and law enforcement officials should act with urgency to appropriately restrict and regulate these sales to protect global patients and consumers.

Indexed as

Drug RecallsIllicit DrugsInternetChinaDrug and Narcotic ControlDrug PrescriptionsHumansIndiaMarketingPharmaceutical Services, OnlineSocial MediaIllicit DrugsDrug recallsDrug withdrawalsInternet pharmaciesMarket removalOnline pharmaciesPublic healthSocial media marketing

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.