【摘要】 目的：对我国创新药物研发政策进行量化评价，揭示其在政策工具、参与主体以及创新过程各维度的分布特征，为政策的完善提供参考。方法：基于政策工具视角，构建“政策工具—参与主体—创新过程”的三维分析框架，对65份国家层面创新药物研发政策进行多维分类和交叉分析。结果：环境型政策工具使用最多(39.62%),供给型和需求型政策工具占比较为均衡，但内部结构差异显著。参与主体方面，企业获得政策扶持最多(30.83%),高校和科研院所最少(9.02%)。政策在创新过程中偏重于研究开发阶段(34.85%),临床试验阶段关注不足(11.62%)。结论：我国创新药物研发政策在政策工具运用、参与主体构成和创新过程覆盖上存在不足。建议优化政策工具内部结构，特别是税收优惠和价格调整等；平衡参与主体各方利益，凝聚政策合力；推动创新药物研发产业升级，增加临床试验和市场推广阶段的政策支持；提高政策三维耦合程度，建立动态评估和调整机制，保障政策效益。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To conduct a quantitative evaluation of China’s policies on innovative drug research and development(R&D), reveal their distribution characteristics in terms of policy tools, participating entities, and various stages of the innovation process, and provide reference for policy improvement. Methods From the perspective of policy tools, a three-dimensional analytical framework of "policy tools-participating entities-innovation process" was constructed to conduct multi-dimensional classification and cross-analysis of 65 national policies on innovative drug R&D. Results Environmental policy tools were the most frequently used(39.62%), while supply-based and demand-based policy tools were relatively balanced but had significant internal structural differences. In terms of participating entities, enterprises received the most policy support(30.83%), while universities and research institutes received the least(9.02%). Policies preferred to the research and development stage(34.85%) in the innovation process, with insufficient attention to the clinical trial stage(11.62%). Conclusion China’s policies on innovative drug R&D have deficiencies in the use of policy tools, the composition of participating entities, and the coverage of the innovation process. It is recommended to optimize the internal structure of policy tools, especially tax incentives and price adjustments, balance the interests of all participants and consolidate policy efforts, promote the upgrading of the innovative drug research and development industry, increase policy support for clinical trials and marketing promotion, improve the degree of three-dimensional coupling of policies, establish dynamic evaluation and adjustment mechanisms, and ensure policy benefits.更多还原