ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2023
A Mixed Methods Study to Explore Relevant Metrics for a Results Framework Measuring the Public Health Impact of Reliance-Based Pathways.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 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
Reliance-based pathways for the marketing authorization of medical products have been identified as valuable regulatory tools for the timely provision of effective, safe, quality medicines for people worldwide; however, little research has been conducted on the best way to measure the public health impact of using reliance-based pathways. The current mixed methods study was designed to explore which characteristics or "metrics" could be used to measure the impact of reliance-based pathways. A quantitative survey (n = 70) and in-depth interviews (IDIs) (n = 10) were employed to query various stakeholders (e.g., industry, regulatory authorities, NGOs) about the metrics they believed would be important to include in a framework designed to measure the impact of reliance-based regulatory pathways on advancing public health. Based on survey results, (1) ability to meet targeted product assessment timeline, (2) increased access to expertise, which is limited or not available in the agency, (3) shortened median number of days (annually) to market for medical products, (4) lower morbidity and mortality rates due to greater access to medical products, and (5) movement toward technical standards harmonization were the Top Five most important metrics to be included in a framework. IDI results suggest that, while important, the relevance of the Top Five metrics may vary by region or regulatory authority. Interviewed stakeholders intuitively believe reliance-based regulatory pathways are a worthwhile endeavor; however, there must be "harmonization" within the reliance ecosystem that creates a strong understanding of the factors necessary for reliance-based pathways to be utilized in a successful manner.
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.