Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37247874›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2023

Investing in a global pooled-funding mechanism for late-stage clinical trials of poverty-related and neglected diseases: an economic evaluation.

Armand Zimmerman, Mohamed Mustafa Diab, Marco Schäferhoff, Kaci Kennedy McDade, Gavin Yamey, Osondu Ogbuoji

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Armand ZimmermanCenter for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1216-581X
Mohamed Mustafa DiabCenter for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2741-349X
Marco SchäferhoffOpen Consultants, Berlin, Germany.
Kaci Kennedy McDadeCenter for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0469-229X
Gavin YameyCenter for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8390-7382
Osondu OgbuojiCenter for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA osondu.ogbuoji@duke.edu.
Duke University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPoverty-related and neglected diseases (PRNDs) cause over three million deaths annually. Despite this burden, there is a large gap between actual funding for PRND research and development (R&D) and the funding needed to launch PRND products from the R&D pipeline. This study provides an economic evaluation of a theoretical global pooled-funding mechanism to finance late-stage clinical trials of PRND products.

methodsWe modelled three pooled-funding design options, each based on a different level of coverage of candidate products for WHO's list of PRNDs: (1) vaccines covering 4 PRNDs, (2) vaccines and therapeutics covering 9 PRNDs and (3) vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics covering 30 PRNDs. For each option, we constructed a discrete event simulation of the 2019 PRND R&D pipeline to estimate required funding for phase III trials and expected product launches through 2035. For each launch, we estimated global PRND treatment costs averted, deaths averted and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted. For each design option, we calculated the cost per death averted, cost per DALY averted, the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

resultsOption 1 averts 18.4 million deaths and 516 million DALYs, has a cost per DALY averted of US$84 and yields a BCR of 5.53. Option 2 averts 22.9 million deaths and 674 million DALYs, has a cost per DALY averted of US$75, an ICER over option 1 of US$49 and yields a BCR of 3.88. Option 3 averts 26.9 million deaths and 1 billion DALYs, has a cost per DALY averted of US$114, an ICER over option 2 of US$186 and yields a BCR of 2.52.

conclusionsAll 3 options for a pooled-funding mechanism-vaccines for 4 PRNDs, vaccines and therapeutics for 9 PRNDs, and vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics for 30 PRNDs-would generate a large return on investment, avert a substantial proportion of the global burden of morbidity and mortality for diseases of poverty and be cost-effective.

Indexed as

Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisNeglected DiseasesCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansHealth economicsHealth policyInfections, diseases, disorders, injuries

Identifiers

PMID37247874
PMCPMC10230859
OpenAlexW4378716666

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.