紧急监管程序、药品监管政治以及 COVID-19 大流行中疫苗监管的政治经济学。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Herschel Nachlis, Kyle Thomson
{"title":"紧急监管程序、药品监管政治以及 COVID-19 大流行中疫苗监管的政治经济学。","authors":"Herschel Nachlis, Kyle Thomson","doi":"10.1215/03616878-10910278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Regulatory approaches to COVID-19 vaccine authorizations varied substantially across countries. Facing a common public health threat, what accounts for regulatory variation? This study focuses on emergency pharmaceutical and vaccine regulatory procedures and whether and how regulators' emergency pharmaceutical regulatory procedures going into the pandemic shaped regulatory processes and decisions during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors conducted an analysis of seven high-impact national and international pharmaceutical regulators with case studies from Brazil, China, India, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Medicines Agency. The authors analyzed evidence from primary source executive and legislative branch regulations and statutes as well as national and international scientific and general press reporting; they also drew on the secondary analysis of scholars, practitioners, and international organizations.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Inherited emergency pharmaceutical and vaccine regulatory procedures substantially shaped COVID-19 vaccine regulation during the pandemic. Variation in the presence and content of emergency regulatory procedures affected the quality of pandemic regulatory processes, outcomes, and procedural updates and differentially empowered policy-making experts and elected politicians.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Emergency regulatory procedures affect key features of regulatory political economy and public health practices during crises. To improve future public health crisis responses, the authors provide policy recommendations for (1) establishing clear emergency pharmaceutical regulatory procedures, and (2) international collaboration.</p>","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"73-98"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emergency Regulatory Procedures, Pharmaceutical Regulatory Politics, and the Political Economy of Vaccine Regulation in the COVID-19 Pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Herschel Nachlis, Kyle Thomson\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/03616878-10910278\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Regulatory approaches to COVID-19 vaccine authorizations varied substantially across countries. Facing a common public health threat, what accounts for regulatory variation? This study focuses on emergency pharmaceutical and vaccine regulatory procedures and whether and how regulators' emergency pharmaceutical regulatory procedures going into the pandemic shaped regulatory processes and decisions during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors conducted an analysis of seven high-impact national and international pharmaceutical regulators with case studies from Brazil, China, India, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Medicines Agency. The authors analyzed evidence from primary source executive and legislative branch regulations and statutes as well as national and international scientific and general press reporting; they also drew on the secondary analysis of scholars, practitioners, and international organizations.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Inherited emergency pharmaceutical and vaccine regulatory procedures substantially shaped COVID-19 vaccine regulation during the pandemic. Variation in the presence and content of emergency regulatory procedures affected the quality of pandemic regulatory processes, outcomes, and procedural updates and differentially empowered policy-making experts and elected politicians.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Emergency regulatory procedures affect key features of regulatory political economy and public health practices during crises. To improve future public health crisis responses, the authors provide policy recommendations for (1) establishing clear emergency pharmaceutical regulatory procedures, and (2) international collaboration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"73-98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10910278\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10910278","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:各国对 COVID-19 疫苗授权的监管方法大相径庭。面对共同的公共卫生威胁,监管差异的原因是什么?本研究的重点是紧急药品和疫苗监管程序,以及监管机构在大流行前的紧急药品监管程序是否以及如何影响了大流行期间的监管过程和决策:作者对巴西、中国、印度、俄罗斯、英国、美国和欧洲药品管理局等七个影响力较大的国家和国际药品监管机构进行了案例研究分析。作者分析了主要来源的行政和立法部门法规和章程以及国内和国际科学和一般新闻报道中的证据;他们还借鉴了学者、从业人员和国际组织的二手分析:研究结果:在大流行期间,继承下来的紧急药品和疫苗监管程序在很大程度上影响了 COVID-19 疫苗的监管。紧急监管程序的存在和内容的不同影响了大流行病监管过程、结果和程序更新的质量,并在不同程度上增强了决策专家和民选政治家的能力:紧急监管程序会影响危机期间监管政治经济学和公共卫生实践的关键特征。为改善未来的公共卫生危机应对,作者提出了以下政策建议:(1)建立明确的紧急药品监管程序;(2)开展国际合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emergency Regulatory Procedures, Pharmaceutical Regulatory Politics, and the Political Economy of Vaccine Regulation in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Context: Regulatory approaches to COVID-19 vaccine authorizations varied substantially across countries. Facing a common public health threat, what accounts for regulatory variation? This study focuses on emergency pharmaceutical and vaccine regulatory procedures and whether and how regulators' emergency pharmaceutical regulatory procedures going into the pandemic shaped regulatory processes and decisions during the pandemic.

Methods: The authors conducted an analysis of seven high-impact national and international pharmaceutical regulators with case studies from Brazil, China, India, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Medicines Agency. The authors analyzed evidence from primary source executive and legislative branch regulations and statutes as well as national and international scientific and general press reporting; they also drew on the secondary analysis of scholars, practitioners, and international organizations.

Findings: Inherited emergency pharmaceutical and vaccine regulatory procedures substantially shaped COVID-19 vaccine regulation during the pandemic. Variation in the presence and content of emergency regulatory procedures affected the quality of pandemic regulatory processes, outcomes, and procedural updates and differentially empowered policy-making experts and elected politicians.

Conclusions: Emergency regulatory procedures affect key features of regulatory political economy and public health practices during crises. To improve future public health crisis responses, the authors provide policy recommendations for (1) establishing clear emergency pharmaceutical regulatory procedures, and (2) international collaboration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
46
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: A leading journal in its field, and the primary source of communication across the many disciplines it serves, the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law focuses on the initiation, formulation, and implementation of health policy and analyzes the relations between government and health—past, present, and future.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信