{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029945553539019964, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0018148820326678765, 'mean_word_length': 5.684848484848485, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
RxLegal: A Rapid Review of Right-To-Try

Right-to-try legislation is intended to allow patients with life-threatening illnesses access to investigational medical treatments without formal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) involvement. Currently, right-to-try laws have been enacted in 40 states. Despite the increased passage of right-to-try legislation at the state level, individuals have detailed arguments both for and against these laws. Proponents state that right-to-try removes regulatory burdens and improves timely access to potentially lifesaving medications for terminally ill patients, reduces inequalities regarding access, and improves patient-provider communication and decision making. Opponents argue that right-to-try does not really guarantee access, reinforces preexisting health care inequalities, prioritizes rapid access over safety and the interests of the individual over the public, and produces concerns regarding informed consent. Despite these issues, right-to-try has recently gained traction on the federal level with both Congressional chambers passing separate bills.