Every two years, the Benchmark methodology is refined based on a targeted review of how stakeholders view pharma’s role in limiting antimicrobial resistance. Find out more about this review and the experts involved.
The Benchmark cycle
Tracking progress in areas that matter
The Antimicrobial Resistance Benchmark is the product of a two-year process known as the ‘Benchmark cycle’. During year one, the Foundation focuses on reviewing the previous Benchmark and consulting expert stakeholders to prepare the methodology for the next Benchmark. During year two, the research team collects, verifies and analyses data about pharmaceutical companies and AMR. Finally, the results are published in a new AMR Benchmark, and the Foundation starts the work of using the findings to spur change across the industry. Here you can read about what this process entails.
AMR priorities
Identifying priority actions for pharma companies on AMR
The Access to Medicine Foundation has developed a robust process for building consensus on how pharmaceutical companies can take action on global health topics.
During year one of each Benchmark cycle we engage with specialists from multilateral organisations, governments, research institutions, the pharma industry, NGOs, patient organisations and investors. We balance their different viewpoints to confirm the global health priorities regarding AMR and pharmaceutical companies’ role in slowing its emergence.
We translate these expectations into the metrics that form the basis of the methodology for the AMR Benchmark. The metrics are designed to capture and compare how a cross-section of the pharmaceutical industry is responding to the global health threat that is AMR. We are supported by independent advisors and technical experts specialised in specific areas of access to medicine.
Our consensus-building activities follow set timelines. If you would like to contribute, please get in touch.
Methodology review
Intensive review every two years
The process for the methodology review includes a series of internal checks on indicators, data sets and analytical approaches. This is followed by an external review during which the consensus view is sought between a range of stakeholders on specific AMR topics and the role for pharmaceutical companies, as well as on the analytical scopes.
Internal reviews of indicators and data
The Foundation’s research team reviews each of the indicators for robustness, response quality and the potential for companies to improve performance through a series of quantitative and qualitative analyses including a qualitative indicator review. This entails, per indicator, a series of qualitative assessments, including relevance to AMR, the clarity of the role for pharmaceutical companies and the potential for longitudinal comparisons.
External review and consensus building
Many aspects of the methodology are discussed and evaluated with international organisations, governments, NGOs, leading research centres and other relevant groups and initiatives addressing AMR. The research team also gathers feedback on the data-collection and analysis process from the companies evaluated in the previous Benchmark reports as well as industry organisations and alliances.
Expert Committee
Eight independent experts on AMR
During the methodology review, strategic guidance is provided by the Expert Committee (EC). The EC is made up of ten independent experts, including from WHO, top-level academic centres, governments in low- and middle income countries, as well as investors and pharmaceutical industry representatives. The EC’s recommendations and strategic guidance help to identify ways forward, especially in areas where uncertainty exists in areas of measurement. The research team adjusts its methodology proposals methodology following the recommendations from the EC. The EC then ratifies the refined framework.
Expert Committee for the next AMR Benchmark
The members of the Expert Committee for the 2021 Benchmark are:
- Chair of the Committee, Hans Hogerzeil, former Professor of Global Health at the University of Groningen and former WHO Director for Essential Medicines and Pharmaceutical Policies
- Gregory Frank, Biotechnology Innovation Organization
- Sudarshan Jain, Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance
- Joakim Larsson, University of Gothenburg
- Marc Mendelson, University of Cape Town
- Maria Larsson Ortino, Legal & General Investment Management
- Mirfin Mpundu, ReAct Africa
- Sarah Paulin, WHO (observer)
