ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2026
Protocol deviations in medicine quality tests.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2026. 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
National, regional and international pharmacopoeias set standards for the quality of medicines and provide instructions for testing to ensure those standards are met. Medicines, tests, standards and methods all vary among the more than 60 pharmacopoeias currently in use. These publications were developed mainly to regulate medicine manufacturing, where safety is essential and methods are generally complex. These methods require sophisticated equipment, specific materials and high levels of skill, and can generate large quantities of pharmaceutical waste. However, pharmacopoeias are also used to guide medicine quality testing for other purposes and in other settings. Notably, they are used in post-marketing surveillance and research on medicine quality in low- and middle-income countries where the prevalence of substandard and falsified medicines is thought to be highest. Regulators and other researchers in these settings may not have access to all the equipment, materials and skills needed to follow pharmacopoeias exactly. Therefore, they often develop work-arounds, which are rarely acknowledged or described when reporting results. Our experience using modified methods for testing amoxicillin tablets in Indonesia suggests that necessary work-arounds can significantly distort study outcomes, potentially leading to misguided policy responses. We argue that standard-setting bodies should recognize challenges to testing in research and surveillance contexts in resource-constrained settings where patient safety is not at immediate risk. These bodies should provide evidence-based guidance on low-cost, environmentally sustainable modifications to industry-standard testing methods for use in these contexts. The research community must inform this guidance, providing details of modifications and their outcomes, both successful and unsuccessful.
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.