ReviewPharmaceutical medicine2025
A Framework for Considering the Role of the Public Sector in R&D of Health Technology.
Review in Pharmaceutical 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 complex price setting and reimbursement of non-industrial advanced therapy medicinal products.Health economics review · 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.
Funding
Abstract
The development of health technologies involves complex, costly, and risky investments, with significant contributions from both public and private sectors. Recent EU pharmaceutical directives propose transparency on public funding to aid pricing negotiations and affordability. However, questions remain regarding how public investments should be measured and their influence on pricing and reimbursement (P&R) decisions. In this paper, we characterise public sector institutions as "payers," "R&D investors," and "regulators". Through a myriad of agencies and decisions, these institutions directly, indirectly or sometime unexpectedly influence risk and return on private research and development (R&D) through P&R, direct investments, and regulatory policy. P&R decisions by payers for innovative therapies influence risk and expected return of future R&D. Value-based pricing offers a more reliable signal of payers' priorities than cost-plus or (international) reference pricing. For greatest impact, public R&D investment should be directed to areas where markets are deficient, such as basic science, translational research, real-world studies, and towards emerging fields like AI and gene editing that will play an increasing role in healthcare and drug development. Applied R&D should be conducted on a financially sustainable basis. Licensing arrangements can be used to recover those investments, while promoting spillover benefits to wider society. Market access regulators are aware of the need for scrupulous transparency and neutrality, but other public sector actors (payers and R&D investors) also must recognise their policies affect the level playing field.
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.