A large amount of pharmaceutical information has been collected and collated by MeTA countries. A country comparison of the completed baseline assessments for the Pharmaceutical Sector Scan (component 1a), the Data Disclosure Survey (component 1b), the Household and Health facility Surveys (Component 2) and the MeTA Multi-stakeholder Assessment (component 3) has been conducted to provide a snapshot of this baseline situation. 

WHO Pharmaceutical Sector Country Profiles can be find here.

Country Comparison of MeTA Pharmaceutical Sector Scan
The cross-country analysis of the Pharmaceutical Sector Scans (component 1a) provides baseline information about the pharmaceutical sector in each of the seven MeTA countries: Ghana, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Peru, the Philippines, Uganda and Zambia.
The first cross-country table presents a list of 45 core and secondary indicators that are considered high priority since they relate to the MeTA key issues such as medicine prices, quality, availability, promotion, and transparency and accountability.
Apart from data extracted from the seven country reports, a traffic light analysis was added to the comparative table to show the degree of availability and disclosure of the data.
The second table compares median consumer price ratios for selected medicines in the public and private sector and for brand originator and lowest price generics.
The third cross-country table lists median price ratios for procurement of selected medicines in the public sector for both originator and generic versions. Explanatory notes and key findings are included in the document.

Disclaimer: The country data are extracted as reported in the individual pharmaceutical sector scan reports, with relevant comments for indicators or countries included under explanatory notes. 

Country Comparison of MeTA Data Disclosure Survey
The cross-country table of data disclosure surveys (component 1b) assembles the available disclosed information in the core MeTA areas of quality, availability, price and the promotion of medicines. For cross-country comparison, a list of 38 core indicators was developed out of the recommended 'key types of data to disclose', listed in the instructions and guidance for conducting the survey. Data was extracted from the qualitative information supplied within the individual country survey reports, prepared by Ghana, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Peru, the Philippines, Uganda and Zambia into a cross-country table of data disclosure surveys.

A traffic light analysis was then applied to the cross-country table, by using - where applicable - green, orange and red colours which refer respectively to (1) available and disclosed, (2) available but restricted access, and (3) not available at all. The table captures 'practice' on what data is actually disclosed at the time the surveys were conducted in a Selected Indicators table and is accompanied by an Explanatory Notes table as well as a Key Findings table.

Disclaimer: The country data are extracted as reported in the individual data disclosure reports, with relevant comments for countries included as text in the cells of the table itself. 

 
Country Comparison of WHO Level II - Health facility & Household surveys
The cross-country analysis of WHO Level II Health facility & Household Surveys (component 2) provides primary baseline data on access to medicines in three MeTA countries: Ghana, the Philippines and Uganda. The first cross-country table presents a list of 35 indicators extracted from the individual Level II health facility reports, while the second cross-country table compares 50 indicators taken from country household survey reports. Data collection in the above countries for both the health facility and household surveys was mainly conducted between May 2008 and May 2009. Data collection in Jordan only commenced in late 2009, and the survey information was not yet available for inclusion in this comparison. It will be integrated into the analysis as soon as it becomes available. Explanatory notes and key findings related to the WHO Level II survey results are also included in the document.

The WHO Level II surveys were conducted in four out of the seven MeTA countries due to limited financial resources and time constraints.

Disclaimer: The country data are extracted as reported in the individual Level II Health facility and Household survey reports, with relevant comments for indicators or countries included under explanatory notes.  

Country Comparison of Multi-stakeholder Assessment
The cross-country table for the Multi-Stakeholder Baseline Assessment (component 3) presents an overview of issues covered by the 360°-degree assessment of the existing levels of multi-stakeholder engagement. It was conducted by five MeTA countries in collaboration with the Institute of Development Studies (IDS), Sussex, UK. The multi-stakeholder assessment data are extracted from the country multi-stakeholder assessment reports, prepared by Jordan, Peru, the Philippines, Uganda and Zambia. The data presented in this cross-country table all relate to the MeTA key issue of multi-stakeholder working and give detailed information on main MeTA stakeholders, MeTA governance and structure, MeTA multi-stakeholder process, barriers and levers to multi-stakeholder engagement and some recommended changes for future multi-stakeholder engagement beyond the pilot phase.

Disclaimer: Apart from minor complementary adaptations that are mentioned in the footnotes, the data are without any modification extracted from the five multi-stakeholder analysis country reports.