Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40211343›Full record

ReviewInternational journal for equity in health2025

Equity and capacity to benefit from early access to medicines schemes.

Sarah J L Edwards, Paul Aliu, Joe Brierley, Søren Holm, Peter J Pitts

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sarah J L EdwardsCenter for Medicine in the Public Interest, New York, NY, 10024, USA. sarah.edwards@ucl.ac.uk.
Paul AliuCenter for Medicine in the Public Interest, New York, NY, 10024, USA.
Joe BrierleyCenter for Medicine in the Public Interest, New York, NY, 10024, USA.
Søren HolmCenter for Medicine in the Public Interest, New York, NY, 10024, USA.
Peter J PittsCenter for Medicine in the Public Interest, New York, NY, 10024, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many diseases, especially rare ones, have not gained the attention or support needed to attract dedicated research interest to be able to develop successful medicines. There is, thus, a significant unmet clinical need, not all of which is (or indeed can be) addressed through the evaluation of investigational treatments introduced within the confines of clinical trials. People with severe life-threatening conditions who are not eligible to participate in any ongoing clinical trials may be able to try investigational medicines through schemes facilitating early use of or expanded access to innovative medicines. Here, we focus on the issue of equity in such programmes. Standard metrics of clinical need which inform operational decisions about equity in resource allocation primarily rely on social goods which have already been evaluated, providing evidence to support the standard assessment of patient 'capacity to benefit' from given medical interventions. Notions of equity have only relatively recently been discussed within research and innovation generally and within the ethics of clinical trials in particular. Considerations of equity, however, require an overview of all these different patient pathways. We suggest that a new formal method to assess eligibility for early use of or expanded access to innovative medicines be used to capture both the severity of the condition and capacity for scientific or social value alongside clinical trials.

Indexed as

Health EquityHealth Services AccessibilityClinical Trials as TopicHumans

Identifiers

PMID40211343
PMCPMC11987251

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.