ReviewAdvances in neurobiology2023
Post-Approval Research in Drug Development: Priorities and Practices.
Review in Advances in neurobiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A prescriber might ask if a new medication is a good option for use in the patients he or she sees in clinic, with their particular blends of demographic and comorbid clinical characteristics. Is this medicine more effective, safe, tolerable, or affordable than the options used in the past? A payer may ask if the new medication offers a more effective, cost-efficient, or convenient alternative to those treatments already being covered. These are the types of questions that are often difficult to answer on the basis of the clinical trials used to support a medication's initial approval, which are generally designed to evaluate a medication's efficacy, safety, and tolerability in narrowly defined patient populations. Consequently, in order to answer the questions most relevant to key stakeholders (i.e., regulators, patients, and clinicians), it is important to continue to examine a medication's impact and characteristics after it has received regulatory approval. Such studies vary in their purpose, scope, and methodology. In this chapter, we review the types of questions most likely to be investigated after regulatory approval, the methods generally used to investigate them, and the characteristics typically considered when prioritizing the allocation of resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36928849What 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.