ArticleRevista de saude publica2020
Judicialization of medicines: effectiveness of rights or break in public policies?
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Legal action for access to resources inefficiently made available in health care systems in Brazil: a case study on obstructive sleep apnea.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2023Article
- Clinical and humanistic impact of pharmacotherapeutic follow-up in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus treated judicially.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2022Article
- An analysis of the essential medicines policy in primary care: Findings from MedMinas project.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Strategies to Approach Medicines Litigation: An Action Research Study in Brazil.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze whether lawsuits for medicines filed against the state of Rio Grande do Norte agree with medical-sanitary and pharmaceutical assistance management criteria established by the public policies of access to medicines in force in Brazil.
methodsThis is a descriptive and retrospective study of the individual lawsuits that claimed medicines in the state of Rio Grande do Norte between 2013 and 2017. Information was collected from the procedural documents on the requested medicines, the diagnoses referred and the origin of the medical prescription, in order to analyze medical-sanitary and pharmaceutical assistance management characteristics.
resultsWe analyzed 987 lawsuits, which requested 1,517 medications. Of these, 60.7% were not part of the National List of Essential Medicines, and, in 75% of the cases, there was a therapeutic alternative in the Brazilian Unified Health System. In 13.6% of the actions, at least one drug was prescribed for off-label use. Prescribers of philanthropic and private services often request medicines not covered by the pharmaceutical care policy. Even judicialized drugs that are part of the national list are constantly requested for non-standard indications.
conclusionsCourt decisions for the supply of medicines violate health rules and make it difficult to manage pharmaceutical assistance, which may weaken the implementation of these policies.
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.