ReviewColombia medica (Cali, Colombia)
Review on transdermal patches: optimization in drug administration.
Review in Colombia medica (Cali, Colombia). 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To synthesize technical, clinical, and regulatory knowledge on transdermal patches and identify persistent gaps that impact their safe and effective use. Methods: Data sources and selection criteria were defined as follows. Sources consulted included PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar; regulatory agency websites (FDA, EMA, ANVISA, INVIMA); and official pharmacopeial and methodological documents (USP-NF, European Pharmacopoeia, OECD). English, Spanish, and Portuguese sources were considered, with no predefined time limits. The last search update was performed on September 9, 2025. Regarding study selection, the narrative approach includes published reviews, relevant primary studies, official regulatory guidance's/Q&A, and pharmacopeia standards related to design, release/permeation, bioavailability/bioequivalence, adhesion, and regulatory frameworks. Non-authoritative or commercial webpages and duplicates were excluded, with priority given to official and peer-reviewed sources. This review was appraised against the SANRA criteria, covering justification of the article's importance, statement of aims, description of the literature search, referencing, scientific reasoning, and appropriate presentation of data. Results: Transdermal systems may offer sustained drug delivery and adherence advantages, but their real-world performance is constrained by biological variability, patient misuse, and fragmented regulatory requirements. Adhesion remains a critical quality attribute, yet test methods are heterogeneous and alignment between Conclusions: Stronger harmonization of adhesion and bioequivalence standards, together with improved patient education and testing under real-life stress conditions, is needed to ensure the quality, safety, and interchangeability of innovator and generic transdermal products.
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.