ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Applied behavioral and decision sciences in support of US FDA's drug regulatory mission.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Turning policy implications into policy impact: Lessons from behavioral science in financial markets.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Science in service: Behavioral research applications across federal agencies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) makes and communicates decisions that directly affect the health choices and well-being of the US public. Behavioral and decision scientists have long supported FDA's pharmaceutical (medical drug) regulatory and public health mission, working alongside clinical and pharmaceutical scientists. This Perspective describes four interrelated cases illustrating these collaborations: a) creating the Benefit-Risk Framework to guide regulatory decisions regarding new drug approvals; b) launching an internal decision support service to facilitate specific regulatory decisions; c) implementing the Patient-Focused Drug Development initiative to strengthen the use of patient input to inform regulatory decision making; and d) developing FDA SOURCE, a dynamic systems simulation model to assess potential strategies to address the US opioid overdose crisis. Key to the success of these efforts has been their behavioral and decision science foundations, strategically implemented by an expert team dedicated to fostering trusted collaborations with internal and external partners. These cases offer a model for other agencies facing complex decisions of public impact.
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.