ArticleJRSM open2024
Audit of essential medicine listing and registration status of medicines on standard treatment guidelines in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda: Case study of malaria, tuberculosis, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Article in JRSM open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- An analysis of the registration of essential medicines in Namibia: a proxy measure of the availability of essential medicines.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To determine alignment between national and World Health Organization (WHO) treatment recommendations, medicines prioritisation in country's essential medicines list (EML), and medicines availability in National drug register. Design: An audit of medicines for malaria, tuberculosis, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus listed in the national standard treatment guidelines (STGs) of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, as of March 2021, against WHO treatment guidelines, and respective country EML and National drug register. Setting: Not applicable. Participants: None. Main outcome measures: Proportion of medicine in country's STGs that align with WHO treatment recommendations, country's EML and country's drug register. Results: Some disease areas had two sets of treatment guidelines - national STGs and disease-specific treatment guidelines (DSGs) developed at different times with different recommended medicines. Both STGs and DSGs included medicines not recommended by the WHO or not listed on the country EML and drug register. Non-WHO-recommended medicines accounted for 17/68 (25%), 10/57 (18%) and 3/30 (10%) of all STG medicines in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, respectively. For tuberculosis, the numbers and proportion of STG medicines listed on the respective national EMLs were 2/6 (33%), 15/19 (79%) and 4/5 (80%) in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. All tuberculosis medicines included in Kenya's and Uganda's STGs were registered compared with only 12/19 (63%) tuberculosis medicines in Tanzania's STG. Conclusions: Alignment between treatment guidelines, EMLs and drug registers is crucial for effective national pharmaceutical policy. Research is needed to understand the inclusion of medicines on STGs and DSGs which fall outside WHO treatment guidelines; the non-alignment of some STGs and DSGs, and STGs and DSGs including medicines which are not on country EML and drug register.
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.