ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2021
The Role of Physicians in Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs: A Mixed-Methods Study of Physicians' Views and Experiences in The Netherlands.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors influencing pharmaceutical companies' decisions to pursue compassionate use programs in the EU: a qualitative study in The Netherlands.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
- Access to anticancer and orphan medicines through compassionate use programs and named patient basis in seven European countries.ESMO open · 2025Article
- The 'false hope' argument in discussions on expanded access to investigational drugs: a critical assessment.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2022Article
- Perspectives of Academic Oncologists About Offering Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- International Country-Level Trends, Factors, and Disparities in Compassionate Use Access to Unlicensed Products for Patients With Serious Medical Conditions.JAMA health forum · 2022Article
- Generating Evidence from Expanded Access Use of Rare Disease Medicines: Challenges and Recommendations.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Early access provision: Awareness, educational needs and opportunities to improve oncology patients' access to care.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- The economic impact of compassionate use of medicines.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Recommending Unfunded Innovative Cancer Therapies: Ethical vs. Clinical Perspectives among Oncologists on a Public Healthcare System-A Mixed-Methods Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Goodbye Hippocrates?Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Treating physicians have key roles to play in expanded access to investigational drugs, by identifying investigational treatment options, assessing the balance of risks and potential benefits, informing their patients, and applying to the regulatory authorities. This study is the first to explore physicians' experiences and moral views, with the aim of understanding the conditions under which doctors decide to pursue expanded access for their patients and the obstacles and facilitators they encounter in the Netherlands. In this mixed-methods study, semi-structured interviews (n = 14) and a questionnaire (n = 90) were conducted with medical specialists across the country and analysed thematically. Typically, our respondents pursue expanded access in "back against the wall" situations and broadly support its classic requirements. They indicate practical hurdles related to reimbursement, the amount of time and effort required for the application, and unfamiliarity with the regulatory process. Some physicians are morally opposed to expanded access, with an appeal to safety risks, lack of evidence, and "false hope." Some of these moral concerns and practical obstacles may be essential targets for change, if expanded access to unapproved drugs is to become available for wider groups of patients for whom standard treatment options are not-or no longer-available, on a more consistent and equal basis.
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.