ArticleEuropean journal of public health2025
Advancing personalized medicine: key priorities for clinical studies and funding systems based on a Europe-China collaborative Delphi survey.
Article in European journal of public health, 2025. 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.
- Personalized medicine and health equity: overcoming cost barriers and ethical challenges.International journal for equity in health · 2025Review
- A roadmap for personalized medicine: the findings of the IC2PerMed project.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Personalized medicine (PM) has the potential to revolutionize healthcare by delivering treatments tailored to individual patients based on their unique characteristics. However, ensuring its effective implementation presents complex challenges, particularly in terms of long-term sustainability. To address these challenges, the IC2PerMed project fosters collaboration between the European Union and China. This study, building on insights from the project, aims to identify key priorities for advancing PM, focusing on Clinical Studies and Funding Systems, with special attention to optimizing resource management, distribution, and protection to support sustainable development. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to achieve consensus on common priorities among China and Europe related to Clinical Studies and Funding Systems. Consensus was measured using the Content Validity Index, requiring an agreement level of 80% or higher for item inclusion. The survey identified 20 key priorities in PM research, split evenly between research initiatives and funding mechanisms. Notable priorities include developing technology for deep phenotyping, standardizing methodological approaches, and fostering public-private collaborations. In funding, the emphasis was placed on involving patient voices in research design and establishing synergies among funders to support larger projects. The findings underscore the importance of structured collaboration between Europe and China in advancing personalised medicine. By addressing identified priorities in research and funding, this initiative can significantly enhance the efficacy of PM, ultimately improving healthcare outcomes globally. The study sets a precedent for future international partnerships aimed at fostering innovation in health sciences.
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.