ArticleActa medica Philippina2025
Redefining Counterfeit Medicines and Updating the Legal Framework to Address Falsified Medicines: A Qualitative Policy Review.
Article in Acta medica Philippina, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The existence of counterfeit medicines has been a long-standing global public health concern. In the Philippines, Republic Act No. 8203 Section 3 provides a definition of counterfeit medicines, outlines prohibited acts, and states liabilities and penalties of concerned parties. The Philippine legal definition of counterfeit medicine needs to be aligned to what is widely accepted by the international community and to update its scope to prevent varied interpretations due to a mix in the categories of "counterfeit medicines." Objective: This qualitative narrative policy review aims to generate evidence on counterfeit and falsified medicines from grey literature and recent publications in order to propose recommendations for updating the legal framework to address specifically "falsified" medical products. Methods: An online search was performed to identify relevant literature that discussed counterfeit medications. A review of narrative textual evidence from grey literature was conducted including extraction of data on the proliferation of fake, unregistered, and substandard medicines from published news articles and reports for the past six years. A review of published literature was also conducted to supplement findings from aforementioned reports and articles. Results: Literature search revealed that the presence of counterfeit medicines remains prevalent in the country despite the enactment of RA 8203. Counterfeited products include over-the-counter medicines, prescription medicines, and vaccines. The classification of counterfeit medicines in grey literature, including news articles and FDA advisories, are aligned with the WHO definitions.
conclusionThere is a clear need to update the regulatory framework on counterfeit medicines which would entail revisiting RA 8203 to amend the definition of counterfeit medicines and other related provisions in alignment with the WHO definitions.
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.