Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38618782›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of health policy and management2023

Benchmarking Drug Regulatory Systems for Capacity Building: An Integrative Review of Tools, Practice, and Recommendations.

Junnan Shi, Xianwen Chen, Hao Hu, Carolina Oi Lam Ung

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of health policy and management, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Junnan ShiState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macao SAR, China.ORCID 0009-0004-6522-036X
Xianwen ChenState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macao SAR, China.ORCID 0009-0008-5903-8368
Hao HuState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macao SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9441-106X
Carolina Oi Lam UngState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macao SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1915-5099

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBenchmarking has been increasingly used on drug regulatory systems to achieve sustainable pharmaceutical system strengthening. This study aimed to identify the scope, tools and benefits of benchmarking regulatory capacities and the most recent development in such phenomenon.

resultsForty-three studies and 6 documents about regulatory benchmarking published between 2005 and 2022 were included in this review. Five benchmarking assessment tools or programmes recommended or adopted by international organizations or government agencies had been identified, which collectively covered 12 major regulatory functions (4 at system level and 8 at operational level) involving 9 indicator categories and 382 sub-indicators. Benchmarking drug regulatory systems was reportedly employed at national, regional and international levels for either internal assessment (mostly on regulatory system establishment, drug review process and post marketing surveillance) or external evaluation (mostly on regulatory standards, drug review process and pharmacovigilance systems) to assess current status, monitor performance, determine major challenges and inform actions for capacity building. Priority of actions in areas such as regulatory process, resources allocation, cooperation and communication, and stakeholder engagement have been suggested for strengthening drug regulatory systems. Nevertheless, the evidence about benchmarking in optimizing regulatory capacities remained underreported.

conclusionThis integrative review depicted a framework for decision-makers about why and how benchmarking drug regulatory systems should be undertaken. For effective benchmarking, well-informed decisions about the goals, the scope, the choice of reference points and benchmarking tools are essential to guide the implementation strategies. Further studies about the positive effects of regulatory benchmarking are warranted to engage continuous commitment to the practice.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingCapacity BuildingDrug and Narcotic ControlHumansCapacity BuildingDrug Regulatory SystemsGlobal Benchmarking ToolNational Regulatory AuthoritiesRegulatory Capacity

Identifiers

PMID38618782
PMCPMC10699822

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.