ReviewHandbook of experimental pharmacology2024
Project-Based Public-Private Collaborations.
Review in Handbook of experimental pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hydrogel Drug Delivery Systems and Liposomal Bupivacaine: Innovations and Future Perspectives in Pain Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The potential of academic drug discovery: successes and challenges.Expert opinion on drug discovery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Project-based collaborations between a single academic group and a single pharmaceutical company arguably are the most frequent form of public-private partnership in preclinical research and development of new drugs. This chapter discusses the benefits of such collaborations for both sides and potential challenges that can arise before and during the conduct of a project. This is largely based on a survey of expectations and experience by 134 academic investigators with a history of engagement in a project-based collaboration with a pharmaceutical company as well as unstructured experience directly, and learned through discussions with colleagues, from the authors. Obviously, a key benefit for both sides is achieving goals that neither could easily achieve by itself. Scientific discovery, and publications, may be a shared benefit, while for academics, funding and access to compounds, and for industry, access to assay technology and reputational factors may be important. Major hurdles can be freedom to publish and assignment of intellectual property rights. On pragmatic grounds, reaching a contract can be cumbersome, which is largely attributable to the legal expectations and needs of both parties. However, overall satisfaction with project-based collaborations appears very high for academic investigators.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39120768What 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.