Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41532146›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2026

Global mechanisms to improve affordability of high-priced medicines: the role of the WHO model lists of essential medicines.

Kristina Jenei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Kristina JeneiDepartment of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3635-5212

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The scope of the WHO Model Lists of Essential Medicines (EML) has evolved from a tool for resource-constrained countries to a global benchmark that includes several high-priced, patented medicines. The addition of high-priced medicines has sparked a recent debate about whether affordability should be more explicitly considered in WHO EML listing decisions. Discussion and Analysis: Currently, WHO must face the difficult task of balancing clinical benefits with the economic realities of the current pharmaceutical market. As such, a key question arises: Should the WHO EML consider prices at the time of listing, or does EML inclusion serve as a catalyst for price reductions through targeted mechanisms post-listing? This analysis explores the complexities of including high-priced medicines on the Model Lists. Analysis: Challenges include market and regulatory exclusivities, marginal clinical benefits, difficulties with applying cost-effectiveness analyses globally, and the disconnect between production costs and market prices. Several mechanisms that could facilitate post-listing price reductions are reviewed, including voluntary and compulsory licenses, pooled procurement, WHO prequalification, price transparency, and political advocacy. These mechanisms are frequently referenced in EML recommendations and the academic literature but have not been examined together. Conclusion: This analysis provides insights to inform ongoing WHO reforms and a foundation for future research evaluating the downstream economic impacts of the WHO EML on access to medicines worldwide.

Indexed as

access to medicineseconomicsEssential medicinespharmaceutical pricingworld health organization

Identifiers

PMID41532146
PMCPMC12794694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.