ArticlePloS one2022
Medicine manipulation: An alternative to mitigate therapeutic gaps in the Brazilian Unified Health System?
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Editorial: Volume II: anti-inflammatory drug development focusing on immune mediated diseases.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Antiretroviral medications for pediatric use in the context of the Unified Health System: are there therapeutic gaps in Brazil?Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2025Article
- Evaluation of marketing authorization and labels of medicines in 2021 WHO Model List of Essential Medicines for Children in China, the Russian Federation and Brazil.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Drug shortages in Latin America: A cross-sectional survey on impact and mitigation in pharmacy and procurement.The journal of medicine accessArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the various initiatives carried out in Brazil and in the world, the challenge of offering essential medicines in adequate presentations remains, especially to the public affected by diseases considered neglected and the pediatric population, for whom the therapeutic options remain limited. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the production of manipulated medicines as a strategy to mitigate therapeutic and access gaps to essential medicines within the Brazilian public health system, called the Unified Health System (SUS). The evaluation, carried out between 2020 and 2021, identified, among the medicines considered essential to the Brazilian health context, those unavailable, for which strategies were evaluated to mitigate the identified unavailability, which is conventionally called therapeutic gaps. For 57% (n = 235) of pharmaceutical presentations identified as therapeutic gaps in SUS, manipulation was identified as the best strategy to promote access. Of these presentations, 30% (n = 70) were identified as priorities in the context of patient care and were mainly related to the demands of the pediatric public and those affected by poverty-related diseases. Concerning poverty-related diseases, the absence of evidence on the development of a standard formula for drugs with indication for such diseases was demonstrated. The need for an annual investment of approximately US$74.75 per capita was estimated to offer treatments in adequate presentations to SUS users, which should reflect in the improvement of the quality of life of about 26 thousand people. It was observed that this investment amount corresponds to only 3% of the budget for the purchase of medicines financed exclusively by the Ministry of Health thorugh the Strategic Component of Pharmaceutical Assistance (CESAF) approved for 2021.
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.