ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Contextual factors in value-based decision support to enhance health technologies adoption: the case of biosimilars.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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.
- Horizon scan of the clinical development landscape of biosimilar products in the UK and EU.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Biosimilar medicines play a critical role in enhancing global health outcomes by improving access to effective biologic treatments. However, their acceptance and implementation, particularly in emerging markets, depend not only on clinical evidence but also on the integration of societal, individual, and cultural values. This paper explores how value-based decision-making can support the adoption of biosimilars across diverse contexts. Methods: A multi-stakeholder workshop was conducted with participants from various countries, focusing on decision-making processes for biosimilars in emerging health systems. Discussions addressed stakeholder roles, contextual influences, and the alignment of evidence with values. A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework was proposed as a tool to systematically integrate measurable outcomes and intangible factors such as trust, perceived quality, and cultural acceptance. Results: Key barriers identified included regulatory uncertainties, limited local evidence, regional data protection constraints, and patient preferences for originator biologics. Participants emphasized the importance of adaptable frameworks that reflect local cultural, economic, and systemic conditions. The proposed MCDA approach was viewed as a promising method for capturing complex value dimensions and facilitating transparent, inclusive decision-making. Broader societal benefits of biosimilars, such as economic development through local production, were also highlighted. Discussion: The workshop underscored the need for value-sensitive implementation strategies that go beyond clinical effectiveness. Integrating context-specific values into evidence-based decision-making can foster trust and support the sustainable adoption of biosimilars. The MCDA framework offers a structured approach to operationalize these principles. Future research should test and refine this model in varied health system settings to support its practical application by policymakers, healthcare providers, and industry stakeholders.
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.