ArticleHealth affairs scholar2026
The Food and Drug Administration's role in supporting therapeutic development to address unmet needs: the National Academies report and beyond.
Article in Health affairs scholar, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Factors influencing FDA drug approval decisions beyond clinical trial evidence: a scoping review.Health affairs scholar · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite substantial progress, many serious diseases continue to lack safe and effective therapies. Building on a recent National Academies consensus study report that offers several recommendations to better align investments in therapeutic development with unmet needs, in this commentary, we focus on the Food and Drug Administration's role in advancing this goal. Historically, FDA has encouraged investment where market incentives fall short, undertaken efforts to address broad scientific challenges, and administered programs to expedite development and review of drugs targeting unmet needs. Under the second Trump administration, FDA has launched several initiatives that continue these key themes, although some have been controversial, primarily due to concerns about resource sufficiency and the potential for political interference. Regarding other domains addressed by the National Academies report, FDA has recently given mixed signals on its commitment to upholding rigorous approval standards; paid limited attention to noted gaps, including improving rigorous postmarket evidence generation and validating the surrogate markers often used to support product approval; and failed to ensure adequate financial and human resources to support the agency's critical work. Engagement with the National Academies report's recommendations can help ensure that FDA continues to advance progress toward addressing unmet medical needs.
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.