ReviewHealth research policy and systems2025
Evaluating the corporate social responsibility agenda for high-cost novel therapies: roles for government and civil society.
Review in Health research policy and systems, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCorporate social responsibility (CSR) activity in the pharmaceutical industry is frequently directed towards improving patient access to medicines amongst low-income populations. This research reports on findings from a mixed literature and key informant study of pharmaceutical sector CSR activity and its applicability in the high-cost novel therapeutics space.
methodsAcademic and grey literature documents were extracted from online databases in a rapid literature review, focusing on four key areas of interest: (i) CSR or benefit company activity, (ii) the pharmaceutical industry, (iii) the development and sale of high-cost novel medicines and (iv) the role of government and civil society in this space. Ten semistructured interviews amongst key informants, including medical activists, pharmaceutical industry representatives, patient advocates, employees at nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), consultants for international organizations and academic researchers were also conducted related to these topics.
resultsWe find that CSR strategies vary depending on partner identity and country ability to pay. Differential pricing schemes and flexible patent approaches tend to be pursued unilaterally by companies, whereas companies frequently partner with local private sector, government, nongovernmental organizations and academic actors when implementing patient support programs, medicines donations, medicines delivery programs and rare and neglected disease research and development (R&D) initiatives. Patient support programs are more prevalent in high-income countries with minimal state-subsidized healthcare, whilst differential and tiered pricing strategies are more frequently pursued in lower-income countries.
conclusionsPharmaceutical CSR strategies may benefit from greater coordination with government and civil society actors. Opportunities for government and civil society actors to take an active role in better aligning CSR activity with patient needs and universal health coverage include promoting greater adoption of alternative corporate structures and providing active external recognition of successful CSR initiatives through reputational and funding awards.
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.