SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
The management of good manufacturing practice (GMP) inspections: a scoping review of the evidence.
Synthesis 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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engineering metal-organic framework-based smart porous nanoplatforms for targeted therapy and theranostic applications.Smart molecules : open access · 2026Review
- Extracellular Vesicles as a Potential Tool in Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy.Biomedicines · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Regulatory agencies impose stringent legislation and guidelines in the pharmaceutical industry to ensure the safety and quality of medicinal products. While most regulatory research focuses on market authorization, there are fewer in-depth discussions covering production management. This scoping review explores how good manufacturing practices (GMP) inspections are conducted and identifies best practices for managing them across several phases. Methods: This review adhered to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews. The SPIDER framework was utilized for qualitative evidence synthesis to develop the inclusion criteria of this study. The chosen databases were PubMed and Embase (English only, 2015-2025), and grey literature was identified via Google Advanced. Results: Of 377 sources screened, 74 sources (19.63%) met the inclusion criteria: 14 academic papers and 60 grey literature sources. Thematic analysis identified key strategies for managing GMP inspections across three phases: pre-inspection, execution, and post-inspection. These findings could improve industry compliance, streamline inspection readiness, and reduce uncertainties. These findings are particularly beneficial in low- and middle-income countries where regulatory frameworks are often less evolved. Improving GMP inspection management can contribute to upholding patient safety. Conclusion: GMP inspection management is an unaddressed topic, and further research could deliver value to regulators and manufacturers. The data in this paper offers recommendations, including a checklist to support GMP inspections, which may be useful to international manufacturers either in its current state or as a template that can be adapted to specific company contexts. This study highlights the need for advanced inspection methodologies, greater transparency, and stronger collaboration between regulators and manufacturers to safeguard public health through what we describe as 'Good Inspection Practices'(GIP).
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.