Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42038924›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2026

Quantifying public and private investment in biopharmaceutical R&D: a study of seven middle- and high-income countries.

Annabelle Fowler, Anupama Tantri, Julia Spencer, Kathleen Grieve, Tanushree Pendharkar, Salome Da Silva Duarte Lepez, Tim Wilsdon

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Annabelle FowlerLife Sciences, Charles River Associates, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0648-5398
Anupama TantriGlobal Public Policy, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Julia SpencerGlobal Public Policy, MSD AG, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Kathleen GrieveEuropean Public Policy, MSD Europe Belgium SRL, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9103-9502
Tanushree PendharkarLife Sciences, Charles River Associates, Washington, DC, USA.
Salome Da Silva Duarte LepezLife Sciences, Charles River Associates, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9283-6777
Tim WilsdonLife Sciences, Charles River Associates, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Fostering biopharmaceutical R&D has been a key element of industrial and innovation policy worldwide. Typically, this requires complementary investments from the public and private sectors. However, there is little empirical evidence on the extent of public and private biopharmaceutical R&D investment in countries outside of the US and Europe. Methods: We conducted a literature review to assess the biopharmaceutical R&D environment and related public policies in seven middle- and high-income countries outside of Europe and the US, selected for geographic diversity and data availability: Australia, Brazil, India, Japan, Singapore, South Africa, and South Korea ( Results: Aggregating across countries, the private sector accounted for 74% of biopharmaceutical R&D spending. Private sector spending within countries ranged from 35% to 92%, with a simple average of 58%. We contextualise differences between these estimates and those from supranational sources. Overall, the public and private sectors both have important roles in biopharmaceutical innovation across countries. The public sector often funds R&D in universities and basic science, with public funding for later stages of R&D, such as clinical trials, varying by country. There are differences in the extent to which countries invest in initiatives to bridge academia and the private sector. Conclusion: Aggregative biopharmaceutical R&D spending data may lead to different insights than data from supranational sources. Given the complementary nature of public and private R&D spending, countries wishing to encourage biopharmaceutical R&D should consider targeted public sector investment to spur an environment conducive to private investment. Since data are sparse and not always comparable across countries, there is a need for increased and consistent tracking of data on R&D spending. Further research is needed to connect country-specific data to policies that support R&D sector productivity.

Indexed as

expenditureinnovationinvestmentmedicinepharmaceuticalsprivatePublicR&Dspending

Identifiers

PMID42038924
PMCPMC13103987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.