ReviewClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2025
Collaborative Real-World Evidence Among Regulators: Lessons and Perspectives.
Review in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Better data for better medicines: a path to data-driven medicines regulation.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2026Article
- Advancing real-world evidence in Brazil: regulatory gaps and global lessons.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Review
- A Fast Path from Innovation to Safe and Effective Medicines.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Review
- The role of MedDRA in global pharmacovigilance and public health during COVID-19: pandemic preparedness and response.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2025Article
- The use of observed-to-expected analyses as a signal detection tool in COVID-19 vaccine safety surveillance: lessons learned from an industry perspective.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities (ICMRA), comprising 38 global medicines regulatory authorities, collaborates on shared challenges, notably during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article focuses on the ICMRA COVID-19 Real-World Evidence (RWE) and Observational Studies Working Group. The Working Group aimed to address challenges related to RWE and observational studies during the pandemic, resulting in impactful studies and ICMRA statements on international collaboration for RWE and COVID-19 vaccine safety. Reflecting on 3 years of collaboration, the Working Group surveyed members for insights, and recommendations were formulated to enhance research preparedness, collaboration, and response to future public health emergencies. The lessons learned highlight the importance of global collaborations, governance structures for rapid decision-making, and effective utilization of existing networks. Recommendations include the establishment of an international governance structure, a "coalition of the willing" for swift research collaboration, dedicated sub-groups, periodic workshops, common protocols, joint timelines, and data model templates, leveraging existing infrastructure, and strengthening outreach for transparency and engagement. The Working Group envisions repurposing into an RWE strategic and operational entity, contributing to global public health emergency response mechanisms. In conclusion, the Working Group's success lies in effective communication, collaborative research, and leveraging existing infrastructure, with ongoing contributions to global emergency response mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.