ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Bridging the gap: enhancing blood regulatory functions in African contexts through comparative analysis.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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.
- The Current State of in vitro Diagnostics Evaluation in Sub-Saharan African Countries: Insights from the Advanced Workshop.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Independent assessments of blood regulatory systems, facilitated by tools such as the WHO's Global Benchmarking Tool (GBT) plus Blood expedites development of National Regulatory Authorites (NRAs) and thus promotes increased access to safe, effective, and quality blood, blood components, and products. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the status of implementation and performance of the regulatory functions for registration and marketing authorization as well as the system for approval of blood, blood components and plasma for fractionation or processes. Methods: We did this by conducting assisted self-benchmarking in 12 African countries using the GBT plus Blood (registration and marketing authorization function, 34 sub-indicators and approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function, 24 sub-indicators). Comparative assessments of WHO-designated maturity level 3 (ML3) NRAs for medicines and vaccines against non-designated NRAs were made. Results: The percentage of implemented sub-indicators was higher for the registration and marketing authorization function with an average implementation score of 73% (range: 51%-92%) compared to the approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function which had an average implementation score of 45% (range: 6%-65%). The comparison of group averages for the ML3-designated NRAs against the non-designated NRAs revealed a higher score 91% (range: 71%-100%) for ML3-designated NRAs as opposed to a lower score of 71% (range: 49%-100%) for the non-designated NRAs for the registration and marketing authorization function. This pattern, however, was not observed for the comparison of group averages for the approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function where the ML3-designated NRAs scored 47% (range 19%-72%) against 46% (range 23%-88%) for the non-ML3-designated NRAs. Conclusion: Most of the NRAs excelled in implementing sub-indicators for the registration and marketing authorization (of plasma-derived medicines) function. All NRAs exhibited notable flaws in regulating blood, blood components, plasma for fraction, and approval of processes, indicating nascent regulatory frameworks. This study highlights the urgent need for WHO and African countries to prioritize formal benchmarking of NRAs using the GBT plus Blood to enhance their regulatory capacities in blood and blood product regulation.
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.