Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29458428›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2018

A review of promoting access to medicines in China - problems and recommendations.

Jing Sun, Cecile Jia Hu, Mark Stuntz, Hans Hogerzeil, Yuanli Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Public preference for COVID-19 vaccines in China: A discrete choice experiment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jing SunSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, 5 Dongdansantiao, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-4646-1174
Cecile Jia HuDeerfield Institute, K Wah Center 3703, Middle Huaihai Rd 1010, 200031, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Mark StuntzDeerfield Institute, 780 Third Avenue, 37th Floor, New York, NY, USA.
Hans HogerzeilDepartment of Health Sciences, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, 9700 RB, The Netherlands.
Yuanli LiuSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, 5 Dongdansantiao, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, People's Republic of China. yliu@pumc.edu.cn.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNDeerfield (United States) · USUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

National Health and Family Planning Commission of the People's Republic of China 2016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite recent reforms, distorting funding mechanisms and over-prescribing still maintain severe financial barriers to medicines access in China. Complicated and interrelated problems in the pharmaceutical sector require a common framework to be resolved as fragmented solutions do not work. We present a preliminary assessment of the impact of the national healthcare reforms on access to medicines, and propose policy recommendations for promoting universal access to medicines in China.

methodsDrawing on multiple sources of information, including a review of published literatures and official national data, field investigations in six provinces and interviews with key opinion leaders, this paper presents a preliminary assessment of the impact of the national healthcare reforms on access to medicines, and proposes policy recommendations for promoting universal access to medicines in China.

resultsPublic expenditure on medicines has been strictly controlled since the national healthcare reforms of 2009. Yet total pharmaceutical expenditure (TPE) and total health expenditure growth rates continuously outpaced the growth of gross domestic product (GDP). With 2.4% of GDP, TPE now exceeds that of most high income countries. The distorted provider and consumer incentives in the Chinese health system have not fundamentally changed. Price-setting and reimbursement mechanisms do not promote cost-effective use of medicines. Inappropriate price controls and perverse financial incentives are the un-resolved root causes of preference of originator brands for some major diseases and shortages of low-cost and low-consumption medicines. In addition, access to expensive life-saving medicines is yet systematically addressed.

conclusionsThe complicated and interdependent problems interact in a way that leads to significant system problems in China, which create dual challenges that both the developing country and the developed countries are facing. To further promote access to medicines, China should speed up the re-assessment of the quality and efficacy of domestically produced generic medicines; coordinate various reforms of price determination, insurance payments, and procurement policies; address medicine shortages through comprehensive policies and legislation; establish specific mechanisms to achieve sustainable equitable access to expensive essential medicines with health technology assessment as a tool to ensure that policy and priority setting are created in a coherent and evidence-based way.

Indexed as

Health Care ReformChinaDrug CostsHealth ExpendituresHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services ResearchHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmaceutical PreparationsAccess to medicinesChinaHealthcare reformsPolicy recommendationsReview

Identifiers

PMID29458428
PMCPMC5819167
OpenAlexW2795320536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.