Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35428250›Full record

SynthesisGlobalization and health2022

What is the impact of intellectual property rules on access to medicines? A systematic review.

Brigitte Tenni, Hazel V J Moir, Belinda Townsend, Burcu Kilic, Anne-Maree Farrell, Tessa Keegel, Deborah Gleeson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Globalization and health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Structural barriers to antifungal drug development.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Trust Beyond Borders: European External Regulatory Influence on Access to Medicines.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

7 authors.

Brigitte TenniSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Plenty Rd &, Kingsbury Dr, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia. 20204549@students.latrobe.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-3356-4967
Hazel V J MoirCollege of Arts and Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Belinda TownsendMenzies Centre for Health Governance, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Burcu KilicDigital Rights Program, Public Citizen, Washington D.C, USA.
Anne-Maree FarrellEdinburgh Law School, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Tessa KeegelSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Plenty Rd &, Kingsbury Dr, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia.
Deborah GleesonSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Plenty Rd &, Kingsbury Dr, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is widely accepted that intellectual property legal requirements such as patents and data exclusivity can affect access to medicines, but to date there has not been a comprehensive review of the empirical evidence on this topic. The World Trade Organization's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) requires Member States to implement minimum standards of intellectual property protection including patents for pharmaceutical products, but also contains 'flexibilities' designed to address barriers to access to medicines. National intellectual property laws can also include TRIPS-plus rules that go beyond what is required by TRIPS. We aimed to systematically review literature that measures the impact of intellectual property rules on access to medicines, whether implemented as a result of TRIPS, TRIPS-plus provisions in other trade agreements, or unilateral policy decisions.

methodsWe searched Proquest, SCOPUS, Web of Science, PubMed, JSTOR, Westlaw and Lexis Nexis. Peer reviewed articles, government reports and other grey literature were included. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were quantitative, in English, included a measure of cost, price, availability of or access to medicines, were about intellectual property or data exclusivity rules and published between January 1995 and October 2020. Ninety-one studies met our inclusion criteria. We systematically reviewed the studies' findings and evaluated their quality using a modified quality assessment template. RESULTS AND

conclusionFive broad overarching themes and 11 subthemes were identified based on the articles' foci. They were: trade agreements (divided into EU FTAs and those that include the USA); use of TRIPS flexibilities (divided into compulsory licencing and parallel importation); patent expiry/generic entry/generic pathway (divided into comparative studies and single country studies); patent policies (also divided into comparative studies and single country studies) and TRIPS-plus rules (divided into data exclusivity, patent term extensions and secondary patenting). Most studies focused not on specific trade agreements, but on TRIPS-plus provisions, which can also be found within some trade agreements. The main finding of this review is that the stronger pharmaceutical monopolies created by TRIPs-plus intellectual property rules are generally associated with increased drug prices, delayed availability and increased costs to consumers and governments. There is evidence that TRIPS flexibilities can facilitate access to medicines although their use is limited to date. There were few studies that included resource poor settings, signalling a need for greater research in such settings where the impact on access to medicines is likely to be more damaging.

Indexed as

CommerceInternational CooperationDrug IndustryDrugs, GenericHealth Services AccessibilityHumansIntellectual PropertyDrugs, GenericCompulsory licencingData exclusivityGeneric medicinesIntellectual propertyPatentsTrade agreementsTRIPS flexibilitiesTRIPS-plus

Identifiers

PMID35428250
PMCPMC9013034

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.