ArticleBMJ open2024
Assessing national medicines policies: a protocol for systematic review of access to medicine assessment metrics and indicators.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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
introductionEfforts to improve access to essential medicines globally include the implementation and assessment of national medicine policies. Although existing assessment tools may identify gaps, they do not link these to health system functions and policy priority areas in a way that facilitates decision-making. This systematic review aims to identify and map out existing indicators assessing essential medicines policies; assess their strengths and limitations and understand the parameters required to develop a new instrument for assessing access to medicines in a way that better supports decision makers in identifying and addressing the gaps in their national medicine policies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review is guided by the updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol. Eligible studies will be identified across scholarly databases (MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus) and grey literature using relevant subject headings and text words. Title, abstract screening and full-text screening will be conducted by two independent reviewers. Indicators or assessment tools focused on the performance of national medicine policies with respect to improving access to essential medicines will be eligible. Data will be extracted using a pretested data abstraction form. Findings will be reported in the form of a descriptive narrative. This study will provide insights into the relevance of existing indicators and tools for assessing access to essential medicines policies. This review will also discuss the opportunities for the development of a new instrument for the assessment of national medicines policies in a way that better supports decision makers to improve access to essential medicines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review does not require ethics approval as it only aims to synthesise evidence from the literature. Findings will be disseminated to key health stakeholders including researchers and global and public health organisations and published in a peer-review journal. This protocol has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023493052).
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.