Observational studyInternational journal for equity in health2022
Judicialization of health: profile of demands for oncological medicines in a state in the central region of Brazil.
Observational study in International journal for equity in health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioethical challenges in the implementation of targeted anti-tumor therapies in low-resource settings: a perspective from Latin America.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2026Review
- USP7 promotes temozolomide resistance by stabilizing MGMT in glioblastoma.Cell death & disease · 2025Article
- Precision Medicine for Cancer and Health Equity in Latin America: Generating Understanding for Policy and Health System Shaping.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Harnessing the law to advance equitable cancer care in South Africa: exploring the feasibility, desirability and added value of a dedicated national cancer act.Ecancermedicalscience · 2024Article
- Health litigation and cancer survival in patients treated in the public health system in a large Brazilian city, 2014-2019.BMC public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe significant increase in access to oncological medicines through court cases suggests that constitutional guarantees of integral and universal care in the Brazilian public health system are uncertain.
methodsA retrospective observational study was conducted to analyze data from lawsuits requesting oncological medicines from 2014 to 2020 in the State of Goiás, Brazil, in state and federal courts. Sociodemographic, medical, and legal variables were statistically examined using descriptive, association, and correlation methods.
resultsWomen brought more than half (54%) of the 301 processes analyzed. The most frequent age group was over 55 years, with income below 3 × the minimum wage (total about USD$600/month), and their cases were promoted through the public minister and public defender's offices. The most requested medications, not on official public health system lists, were indicated for multiple myeloma and brain cancer.
conclusionsImproved quality of life, frequently used as a justification, could be conceptually confused with increased survival. Finally, judicialization itself indicates that individual health needs arise even with properly defined and adequately implemented public policies. These needs should be considered for the adequate provisioning of services by the state to ensure the right to health.
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.