Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32138789›Full record

SynthesisGlobalization and health2020

Public-private knowledge transfer and access to medicines: a systematic review and qualitative study of perceptions and roles of scientists involved in HPV vaccine research.

Rosa Jahn, Olaf Müller, Stefan Nöst, Kayvan Bozorgmehr

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Globalization and health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rosa JahnDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. rosa.jahn@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Olaf MüllerHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Stefan NöstDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Kayvan BozorgmehrDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
University Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublic research organizations and their interactions with industry partners play a crucial role for public health and access to medicines. The development and commercialization of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines illustrate how licensing practices of public research organizations can contribute to high prices of the resulting product and affect accessibility to vulnerable populations. Efforts by the international community to improve access to medicines have recognised this issue and promote the public health-sensitive management of research conducted by public research organizations. This paper explores: how medical knowledge is exchanged between public and private actors; what role inventor scientists play in this process; and how they view the implementation of public health-sensitive knowledge exchange strategies.

methodsWe conducted a systematic qualitative literature review on medical knowledge exchange and qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of public sector scientists working on HPV vaccines. We explored the strategies by which knowledge is exchanged across institutional boundaries, how these strategies are negotiated, and the views of scientists regarding public health-sensitive knowledge exchange.

resultsWe included 13 studies in the systematic review and conducted seven semi-structured interviews with high-ranking scientists. The main avenues of public-private medical knowledge exchange were publications, formal transfer of patented knowledge, problem-specific exchanges such as service agreements, informal exchanges and collaborative research. Scientists played a crucial role in these processes but appeared to be sceptical of public health-sensitive knowledge exchange strategies, as these were believed to deter corporate interest in the development of new medicines and thus risk the translation of the scientists' research.

conclusionMedical scientists at public research institutions play a key role in the exchange of knowledge they generate and are concerned about the accessibility of medicines resulting from their research. Their scepticism towards implementing public health-sensitive knowledge management strategies appears to be based on a biased understanding of the costs and risks involved in drug development and a perceived lack of alternatives to private engagement. Scientists could be encouraged to exchange knowledge in a public health-sensitive manner through not-for-profit drug development mechanisms, education on industry engagement, and stronger institutional and legal backing.

Indexed as

PerceptionPublic-Private Sector PartnershipsHealth Services AccessibilityHumansPapillomavirus VaccinesQualitative ResearchResearch PersonnelPapillomavirus VaccinesAccess to medicines; medical research and developmentProphylactic HPV vaccinesPublic-private technology transferUniversity innovation

Identifiers

PMID32138789
PMCPMC7059709
OpenAlexW3011881320

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.