SynthesisApplied health economics and health policy2026
Estimating the Share of Social Surplus Generated by Pharmaceutical Innovation Accruing to Manufacturers: A Systematic Literature Review.
Synthesis in Applied health economics and health policy, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPharmaceutical innovation operates within an implicit social contract that seeks to balance incentives for future drug development with equitable access to current therapies. A key metric for evaluating this balance is producer surplus (PS), which represents the share of total social surplus (the sum of consumer surplus [CS] and PS) captured by manufacturers. We explore the determinants and distribution of estimated supply-side surplus share across therapeutic areas, drug classes, and product life cycles.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review of empirical studies on PS in pharmaceuticals. Embase and EconLit databases were searched from database inception to April 2025. Search practices followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance.
resultsA total of 24 studies were included, representing 68 unique PS estimates. Our analysis reveals wide variation in PS estimates, from 0.3% to 260%, with a median of approximately 15%. The range of estimates is driven primarily by disease-specific factors and methodological inconsistencies. Notably, most studies fail to account for the full spectrum of social benefits or to accurately identify manufacturer revenues, often conflating PS with broader supply chain gains. Only one study met rigorous criteria for both PS and CS definitions.
conclusionThe limitations of current studies on PS hinder the utility of PS in value assessment and policymaking. We argue for greater methodological rigor and consistency to improve PS estimation and inform sustainable public policy.
Identifiers
42745106What 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.