The Drug Facts Box: Improving the communication of prescription drug information

被引:73
作者
Schwartz, Lisa M. [1 ]
Woloshin, Steven
机构
[1] Dept Vet Affairs Med Ctr, VA Outcomes Grp, White River Jct, VT 05009 USA
关键词
physician-patient communication; evidence summaries; data presentation; MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER; ADJUNCTIVE THERAPY; EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE; RANDOMIZED-TRIALS; DOUBLE-BLIND; CONSUMER; EFFICACY; OUTCOMES; ADVERTISEMENTS; ARIPIPRAZOLE;
D O I
10.1073/pnas.1214646110
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Communication about prescription drugs ought to be a paragon of public science communication. Unfortunately, it is not. Consumers see $4 billion of direct-to-consumer advertising annually, which typically fails to present data about how well drugs work. The professional label-the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) mechanism to get physicians information needed for appropriate prescribing-may also fail to present benefit data. FDA labeling guidance, in fact, suggests that industry omit benefit data for new drugs in an existing class and for drugs approved on the basis of unfamiliar outcomes (such as depression rating scales). The medical literature is also problematic: there is selective reporting of favorable trials, favorable outcomes within trials, and "spinning" unfavorable results to maximize benefit and minimize harm. In contrast, publicly available FDA reviews always include the phase 3 trial data on benefit and harm, which are the basis of drug approval. However, these reviews are practically inaccessible: lengthy, poorly organized, and weakly summarized. To improve accessibility, we developed the Drug Facts Box: a one-page summary of benefit and harm data for each indication of a drug. A series of studies-including national randomized trials-demonstrates that most consumers understand the Drug Facts Box and that it improves decision-making. Despite calls from their own Risk Communication Advisory Committee and Congress (in the Affordable Care Act) to consider implementing boxes, the FDA announced it needs at least 3-5 y more to make a decision. Given its potential public health impact, physicians and the public should not have to wait that long for better drug information.
引用
收藏
页码:14069 / 14074
页数:6
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [1] Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials - A reflection of treatment effect or adverse events?
    Als-Nielsen, B
    Chen, WD
    Gluud, C
    Kjaergard, LL
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2003, 290 (07): : 921 - 928
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2012, HLTH US 2011 SPEC FE
  • [3] [Anonymous], US MED US REV 2011
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2011, Communicating Risks and Benefits
  • [5] [Anonymous], MED GUID
  • [6] Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising and the public
    Bell, RA
    Kravitz, RL
    Wilkes, MS
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1999, 14 (11) : 651 - 657
  • [7] Bell RA, 2000, J FAM PRACTICE, V49, P1092
  • [8] The efficacy and safety of aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study
    Berman, Robert M.
    Marcus, Ronald N.
    Swanink, Rene
    McQuade, Robert D.
    Carson, William H.
    Corey-Lisle, Patricia K.
    Khan, Arif
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2007, 68 (06) : 843 - 853
  • [9] Factors associated with findings of published trials of drug-drug comparisons: Why some statins appear more efficacious than others
    Bero, Lisa
    Oostvogel, Fieke
    Bacchetti, Peter
    Lee, Kirby
    [J]. PLOS MEDICINE, 2007, 4 (06) : 1001 - 1010
  • [10] Reporting and Interpretation of Randomized Controlled Trials With Statistically Nonsignificant Results for Primary Outcomes
    Boutron, Isabelle
    Dutton, Susan
    Ravaud, Philippe
    Altman, Douglas G.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2010, 303 (20): : 2058 - 2064