Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41883222›Full record

ReviewJournal of comparative effectiveness research2026

Access in all areas? A round-up of developments in market access and health technology assessment: part 14.

Sreeram V Ramagopalan, Annie Jullien Pannelay

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Sreeram V RamagopalanCentre for Pharmaceutical Medicine Research, King's College London, SE1 9NH, UK.
Annie Jullien PannelayUniversité Paris Saclay, UFR Pharmacie, Orsay France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this update we examine the selection of 15 drugs for the third cycle of Medicare price negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Act and analyze emerging evidence of the Most-Favored-Nation impact on global pharmaceutical access, including launch delays and market withdrawals. We also review recent research on the tension between US patient values and foreign health technology assessment frameworks and discuss the review of the first year of implementation of the Joint Clinical Assessment procedure in Europe.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalDrug CostsEuropeHumansMedicareUnited StatesEMAEuropehealth economicshealth policyhealth technology assessmentInflation Reduction ActJoint Clinical Assessmentmarket accessMedicareMost-Favored-Nationpatient valuesUS

Identifiers

PMID41883222
PMCPMC13154921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.