PHARMACEUTICAL ADVERTISEMENTS IN LEADING MEDICAL JOURNALS - EXPERTS ASSESSMENTS

被引:194
作者
WILKES, MS
DOBLIN, BH
SHAPIRO, MF
机构
[1] General Internal Medicine Division, UCLA Department of Medicine, Los Angeles
关键词
ADVERTISING; DRUG INFORMATION SERVICES; DRUG INDUSTRY; UNITED-STATES-FOOD-AND-DRUG-ADMINISTRATION;
D O I
10.7326/0003-4819-116-11-912
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: To assess both the accuracy of scientific data presented in print pharmaceutical advertisements and the compliance of these advertisements with current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standards. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Measurements: Each full-page pharmaceutical advertisement (n = 109) appearing in 10 leading medical journals, along with all available references cited in the advertisement (82% of the references cited were available) were sent to three reviewers: two physicians in the relevant clinical area who were experienced in peer review and one academic clinical pharmacist. Reviewers, 95% of whom responded, were asked to evaluate the advertisements using criteria based on FDA guidelines, to judge the educational value and overall quality of the advertisements, and to make a recommendation regarding publication. Results: In 30% of cases, two or more reviewers disagreed with the advertisers' claim that the drug was the "drug of choice." Reviewers felt that information on efficacy was balanced with that on side effects and contraindications in 49% of advertisements but was not balanced in 40%. Reviewers agreed with advertisements' claims that the drug was safe in 86% of the cases but judged that headlines in 32% of the advertisements containing headlines misled the reader about efficacy. In 44% of cases, reviewers felt that the advertisement would lead to improper prescribing if a physician had no other information about the drug other than that contained in the advertisement. Fifty-seven percent of advertisements were judged by two or more reviewers to have little or no educational value. Overall, reviewers would not have recommended publication of 28% of the advertisements and would have required major revisions in 34% before publication. Conclusion: In the opinion of the reviewers, many advertisements contained deficiencies in areas in which the FDA has established explicit standards of quality. New strategies are needed to ensure that advertisements comply with standards intended to promote proper use of the products and to protect the consumer.
引用
收藏
页码:912 / 919
页数:8
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]  
AHMAD SR, 1991, LANCET, V338, P1384
[2]   SCIENTIFIC VERSUS COMMERCIAL SOURCES OF INFLUENCE ON THE PRESCRIBING BEHAVIOR OF PHYSICIANS [J].
AVORN, J ;
CHEN, M ;
HARTLEY, R .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1982, 73 (01) :4-8
[3]   DOCTORS, DRUG COMPANIES, AND GIFTS [J].
CHREN, MM ;
LANDEFELD, CS ;
MURRAY, TH .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1989, 262 (24) :3448-3451
[4]   SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND INFLUENCE ON NEW DRUG PRESCRIBING AMONG PHYSICIANS IN AN HMO [J].
CHRISTENSEN, DB ;
WERTHEIMER, AI .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE PART A-MEDICAL SOCIOLOGY, 1979, 13 (3A) :313-322
[5]  
FASSOLD RW, 1968, CAN MED ASSOC J, V98, P701
[6]   PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED BY SECONDARY REVIEW OF ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPTS [J].
GARFUNKEL, JM ;
ULSHEN, MH ;
HAMRICK, HJ ;
LAWSON, EE .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 263 (10) :1369-1371
[7]  
GORSKI TN, 1990, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V263, P2177, DOI 10.1001/jama.1990.03440160039016
[8]   FDA APPROACH TO DEFINING MISLEADING ADVERTISING [J].
JACOBY, J ;
SMALL, C .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 1975, 39 (04) :65-68
[9]   PHYSICIANS ORIENTATION TOWARD LEGITIMACY OF DRUG USE AND THEIR PREFERRED SOURCE OF NEW DRUG INFORMATION [J].
LINN, LS ;
DAVIS, MS .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 1972, 6 (02) :199-203
[10]  
LIPTON HL, 1988, DRUGS ELDERLY CLIN S