25 years of the WHO essential medicines lists: progress and challenges
Open accessAbstract
The first WHO essential drugs list, published in 1977, was described as a peaceful revolution in international public health. The list helped to establish the principle that some medicines were more useful than others and that essential medicines were often inaccessible to many populations. Since then, the essential medicines list (EML) has increased in size; defining an essential medicine has moved from an experience to an evidence-based process, including criteria such as public-health relevance, efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. High priced medicines such as antiretrovirals are now included. Differences exist between the WHO model EML and national EMLs since countries face varying challenges relating to costs, drug effectiveness, morbidity patterns, and rationality of prescribing. Ensuring equitable access to and rational use of essential medicines has been promoted through WHO's revised drug strategy. This approach has required an engagement by WHO on issues such as the effect of international trade agreements on access to essential medicines and research and development to ensure availability of new essential medicines.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Dermatologic diseases are receiving more attention and have increasingly been included on the WHO List of Essential Medicines.
“dermatologic diseases are receiving more attention and have increasingly been included on the WHO List of Essential Medicines”
From Global Burden of Skin Disease: Inequities and Innovations (2017) · cites this paper as [25]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 17 · Cited by 321
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Hogerzeil HV. Selection of essential drugs: standardized supply of essential drugs in Ghana, 1. Tropical Doctor 1984; 16: 1986: 113-16.
- Gray A, Eagles P. Drug policy. In: Barron P, ed. South African health review 1997. Durban: Health Systems Trust, 1997: 99-104.
- Anon. WT/GC/W/282. Preparations for the 1999 ministerial conference: proposals regarding the TRIPS agreement. Communication from Venezuala, 1999. http://docsonline.wto.org/gen_search.asp (accessed May, 2003).
- Scholtz M. Views and perspectives on compulsory licensing. Conference on AIDS and essential medicines and compulsory licensing, Geneva, March 27-29, 1999. Geneva: Médecins Sans Frontières, 1999.
- Authors
- Laing, R., Waning, B., Gray, A., Ford, N., & 't Hoen, E.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (US)
- University of KwaZulu-Natal (ZA)
- Médecins Sans Frontières (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Laing, Richard
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-05
- Volume
- 361
- Issue
- 9370
- Pages
- 1723-1729
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W1964139689
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 3.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- The Lancet (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Medecins Sans Frontieres Field Research (Medecins Sans Frontieres) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- United States Agency for International Development (HRN-A-00-00-00016-00)
- Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
- University of Cape Town
- Center for International Health
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pharmaceutical Quality and Counterfeiting
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
- Keywords
- WHO Model List of Essential Medicines, essential medicines, access to medicines, rational drug use, drug pricing, antiretroviral drugs, international trade agreements, pharmaceutical R&D
- MeSH terms
- Consumer Advocacy, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Forecasting, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Policy Making, South Africa, World Health Organization, Models, Organizational, Guidelines as Topic, Health Care Reform, Intellectual Property, History, 20th Century, History, 21st Century
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
