Drug Review in Canada: A Comparison With Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States

被引:0
作者
Nigel S. B. Rawson
Kenneth I. Kaitin
Kate E. Thomas
Grant Perry
机构
[1] University of Saskatchewan,College of Pharmacy and Nutrition
[2] Memorial University of Newfoundland,Division of Community Health, Health Sciences Centre
[3] Tufts University,Center for the Study of Drug Development
[4] Centre for Medicines Research International,undefined
[5] Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada,undefined
来源
Drug information journal : DIJ / Drug Information Association | 1998年 / 32卷 / 4期
关键词
Drug approval; Canada; United States; United Kingdom; Australia; Sweden;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
To evaluate the timeliness of the Canadian drug review process, data on approval times of nonbiologic new chemical entities approved between 1992 and 1995 were obtained for Canada, Australia, and Sweden from their national drug regulatory agencies, for the United States from Tufts University’s Center for the Study of Drug Development, and for the United Kingdom from the Centre for Medicines Research International. The information was augmented by a survey of companies performed by the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada. The overall Canadian median approval time (917 days) was significantly longer (p < 0.001) than those of all the other countries: Australia (620), Sweden (368), the United Kingdom (542), and the United States (623). On a yearly basis, approval times in Canada were significantly longer in 1992–1994, but the median time improved in 1995 to 650 days, which was not significantly different from any of the other countries (562, 444, 439, and 464 days, respectively). Further work is required, however, to achieve established review time performance targets and to reduce approval times in all therapeutic classes.
引用
收藏
页码:1133 / 1141
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Factors associated with antiretroviral treatment uptake and adherence: a review. Perspectives from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom [J].
Bolsewicz, K. ;
Debattista, J. ;
Vallely, A. ;
Whittaker, A. ;
Fitzgerald, L. .
AIDS CARE-PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIO-MEDICAL ASPECTS OF AIDS/HIV, 2015, 27 (12) :1429-1438
[22]   Exploring Indigenous education leadership research in Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand [J].
Fan, Xiao ;
Liu, Peng .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 2020, 22 (04) :281-297
[23]   Institutional logics and indigenous research sovereignty in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand [J].
Rios, Claudia Diaz ;
Dion, Michelle L. ;
Leonard, Kelsey .
STUDIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2020, 45 (02) :403-415
[24]   FAMILY LAW PROCEEDINGS AND THE CHILD'S RIGHT TO BE HEARD IN AUSTRALIA, THE UNITED KINGDOM, NEW ZEALAND, AND CANADA [J].
Fernando, Michelle .
FAMILY COURT REVIEW, 2014, 52 (01) :46-59
[25]   Private health insurance in the United States and Sweden: A comparative review [J].
Dave, Udit ;
Lewis, Emma G. ;
Patel, Jenilkumar H. ;
Godbole, Nikhil .
HEALTH SCIENCE REPORTS, 2024, 7 (03)
[26]   Use of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses for Decisions About Vaccination Programs for Meningococcal Disease in the United States, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Canada [J].
Huang, Liping ;
Mauskopf, Josephine ;
Farkouh, Ray ;
Masaquel, Catherine .
EXPERT REVIEW OF VACCINES, 2021, 20 (01) :59-72
[27]   Update: comparison of drug use in Australia and the United States as seen in the 2001 National Household Surveys [J].
Maxwell, JC .
DRUG AND ALCOHOL REVIEW, 2003, 22 (03) :347-357
[28]   Labour market policy in the United States, Canada and Sweden: Addressing the issue of convergence [J].
Olsen, Gregg M. .
SOCIAL POLICY & ADMINISTRATION, 2008, 42 (04) :323-341
[29]   Gastroschisis outcomes in North America: a comparison of Canada and the United States [J].
Youssef, Fouad ;
Cheong, Li Hsia Alicia ;
Emil, Sherif .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 2016, 51 (06) :891-895
[30]   eBusiness in the forest products industry: A comparison of the United States and Canada [J].
Vlosky, RP ;
Pitis, OT .
FORESTRY CHRONICLE, 2001, 77 (01) :91-95