Evidence from systematic reviews on policy approaches to improving access to medicines
Healthcare in Low-Resource Settings, ISSN: 2281-7824, Vol: 11, Issue: 1
2023
- 12Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures12
- Readers12
- 12
Article Description
The prevailing frameworks on access to medicines advise global procurement as a solution by assuming the presence of medicines on the global market. Yet access to medicines remains challenging, especially in developing countries. This is a global worry because the UN considers limited access to essential medicines as one of the five indicators of securing the right to health. To fill a research gap in health system studies and inform policymaking, we synthesized evidence from systematic reviews of how government policies affect low- and middle-income country (LMIC) medicine access. We chose a rapid review approach to reduce timelines and avoid missing policy “windows of opportunity.” To include only studies published after the start of COVID-19, we chose systematic reviews published between 2019 and November 2nd, 2022. This was also in line with recommendations in the literature to look at recent systematic reviews. The themes were grouped using a thematic and textual narrative approach. This review included 32 studies that examined access to medicine from various perspectives. Both supply- and demand-side policies are needed to improve medical access. LMICs cannot afford medicines, and supply never meets demand. LMICs will continue to struggle with pharmaceutical pricing due to their limited bargaining power. The urban bias in health facilities and policy changes reduce medicine availability and use. Leaders must make policy decisions to sustain domestic funds. Policymakers should consider that organizations may act against policy goals. Instead of copying developed nations, LMIC governments must develop multipronged strategies to address their unique challenges.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know