Dataset Information

Direct-to-Consumer Promotion of Prescription Drugs on Mobile Devices: Content Analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations state that any prescription drug promotion that presents drug benefits to consumers must also disclose certain information about the drug's risks in a similar manner. Nearly three-quarters of all US mobile phone subscribers use a smartphone, and over half report receiving mobile advertisements on their device. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this project was to investigate how prescription drugs are being promoted to consumers using mobile technologies. We were particularly interested in the presentation of drug benefits and risks, with regard to presence, placement, and prominence. METHODS:We analyzed a sample of 51 mobile promotional communications and their associated linked landing pages. We assessed the content and format of the mobile communications and landing pages with regard to presentation of drug benefits and risks. RESULTS:Of the 51 mobile communications we coded, 41% (21/51) were product claim communications (includes the drug name, benefits, and risks), 22% (11/51) were reminder communications (includes drug name only), and 37% (19/51) were help-seeking communications (includes information about the medical condition but not the drug name). Some of the product claim communications (5/21, 24%) required scrolling to see all the benefit information; in contrast, 95% (20/21) required scrolling to see all the risk information. Of the 19 product claim communications that presented both benefits and risks, 95% (18/19) presented benefits before risks and 47% (9/19) used a bigger font for benefits than for risks. Most mobile communications (35/51, 69%) linked to branded drug websites with both benefits and risks, 25% (13/51) linked to a landing page with benefits but no visible risks, and 6% (3/51) linked to a landing page with risks but no visible benefits. Few landing pages (4/51, 8%) required scrolling to see all the benefit information; in contrast, 51% (26/51) required scrolling to see all the risk information. Of the 35 landing pages with both benefit and risk information, 71% (25/35) presented benefits before risks and 51% (18/35) used a bigger font for benefits than for risks. CONCLUSIONS:These results indicate that, while risks and benefits are both represented in mobile communications and their associated landing pages, they are not equally prominent and accessible. This has implications for compliance with FDA fair balance regulations.

SUBMITTER: Aikin KJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5516101 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Direct-to-Consumer Promotion of Prescription Drugs on Mobile Devices: Content Analysis.

Aikin Kathryn J KJ Sullivan Helen W HW Dolina Suzanne S Lynch Molly M Squiers Linda B LB

Journal of medical Internet research 20170704 7

<h4>Background</h4>US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations state that any prescription drug promotion that presents drug benefits to consumers must also disclose certain information about the drug's risks in a similar manner. Nearly three-quarters of all US mobile phone subscribers use a smartphone, and over half report receiving mobile advertisements on their device.<h4>Objective</h4>The objective of this project was to investigate how prescription drugs are being promoted to consumer ...[more]

PMID: 28676469

Similar Datasets

Project description:The current direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) guidelines were developed with print, television, and radio media in mind, and there are no specific guidelines for online banner advertisements.This study evaluates how well Internet banner ads comply with existing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines for DTCA in other media.A content analysis was performed of 68 banner advertisements. A coding sheet was developed based on (1) FDA guidance documents for consumer-directed prescription drug advertisements and (2) previous DTCA content analyses. Specifically, the presence of a brief summary detailing the drug's risks and side effects or of a "major statement" identifying the drug's major risks, and the number and type of provisions made available to consumers for comprehensive information about the drug were coded. In addition, the criterion of "fair balance," the FDA's requirement that prescription drug ads balance information relating to the drug's risks with information relating to its benefits, was measured by numbering the benefit and risk facts identified in the ads and by examining the presentation of risk and benefit information.Every ad in the sample included a brief summary of risk information and at least one form of adequate provision as required by the FDA for broadcast ads that do not give audiences a brief summary of a drug's risks. No ads included a major statement. There were approximately 7.18 risk facts for every benefit fact. Most of the risks (98.85%, 1292/1307) were presented in the scroll portion of the ad, whereas most of the benefits (66.5%, 121/182) were presented in the main part of the ad. Out of 1307 risk facts, 1292 were qualitative and 15 were quantitative. Out of 182 benefit facts, 181 were qualitative and 1 was quantitative. The majority of ads showed neutral images during the disclosure of benefit and risk facts. Only 9% (6/68) of the ads displayed positive images and none displayed negative images when presenting risks facts. When benefit facts were being presented, 7% (5/68) showed only positive images. No ads showed negative images when the benefit facts were being presented.In the face of ambiguous regulatory guidelines for online banner promotion, drug companies appear to make an attempt to adapt to regulatory guidelines designed for traditional media. However, banner ads use various techniques of presentation to present the advertised drug in the best possible light. The FDA should formalize requirements that drug companies provide a brief summary and include multiple forms of adequate provision in banner ads.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:The factors determining individuals' self-reported behavioural responses to direct to consumer advertising of prescription drugs were explored with an emphasis on 'at-risk' individuals' responses. DESIGN:Nationally representative cross-sectional survey. SETTING:Community living adults in New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS:2057 adults (51% women). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Self-reported behavioural responses to drug advertising (asking a physician for a prescription, asking a physician for more information about an illness, searching the internet for more information regarding an illness and asking a pharmacist for more information about a drug). METHODS:Multivariate logistic regressions determined whether participants' self-reported behavioural responses to drug advertising were predicted by attitudes towards advertising and drug advertising, judgements about safety and effectiveness of advertised drugs, self-reported health status, materialism, online search behaviour as well as demographic variables. RESULTS:Identifying as Indian and to a less extent Chinese, Māori and 'other' ethnicities were the strongest predictors of one or more self-reported responses (ORs 1.76-5.00, Ps<0.05). Poorer self-reported health status (ORs 0.90-0.94, all Ps<0.05), favourable attitude towards drug advertising (ORs 1.34-1.61, all Ps<0.001) and searching for medical information online (ORs 1.32-2.35, all Ps<0.01) predicted all self-reported behavioural outcomes. Older age (ORs 1.01-1.02, Ps<0.01), less education (OR 0.89, P<0.01), lower income (ORs 0.89-0.91, Ps<0.05) and higher materialism (ORs 1.02-1.03, Ps<0.01) also predicted one or more self-reported responses. CONCLUSIONS:Taken together, the findings suggest individuals, especially those who are 'at-risk' (ie, with poorer self-reported health status, older, less educated, lower income and ethnic minorities), may be more vulnerable to drug advertising and may make uninformed decisions accordingly. The outcomes raise significant concerns relating to the ethicality of drug advertising and suggest a need for stricter guidelines to ensure that drug advertisements provided by pharmaceutical companies are ethical.

Project description:Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs can be both beneficial and harmful to healthcare consumers. Therefore, DTCA for prescription drugs is a topic that should be considered crucially, at this point, when the interests of patients as well as pharmaceutical companies in DTCA of prescription drugs are growing in South Korea. The goals of this study were to investigate Korean college students' perceptions and attitudes about DTCA of prescription drugs through a survey as well as to analyze data according to their college majors in order to identify differences in their perceptions and attitudes about prescription drug DTCAs as future health care professionals and consumers, respectively. A descriptive, cross-sectional survey was conducted between September and November 2015. Participants were recruited from Chosun University in Gwangju, South Korea. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Chosun University Institutional Review Board. Of 1,040 questionnaires initially distributed, 774 were collected, and 742 were included in the analysis. The results of this study indicated that most students who had participated in the survey did not have sufficient knowledge of DTCA for prescription drugs. Approximately, 17% reported being cognizant of DTCA for prescription drugs. More healthcare students (24.6%) knew this term than non-healthcare students did (6.3%). In this study, most of the students were likely to feel that healthcare professionals (e.g., doctors and pharmacists) had the responsibility of delivering information about prescription drugs to patients, and that all prescription drugs DTCA, if it were permitted, had to be pre-approved by the Korean government. The results of this study indicated that DTCA for prescription drugs had to be permitted under the condition of pre-approval of the DTCA contents by the Korean government, and prescription drugs should not be advertised through the Internet. It is recommended that the Korean government cautiously examine whether DTCA of prescription drugs should be permitted, after considering the current marketing strategies of pharmaceutical companies on the Internet and the effects of online electronic-DTCA on Korean consumers.

Project description:BackgroundFalse and misleading advertising for drugs can harm consumers and the healthcare system, and previous research has demonstrated that physician-targeted drug advertisements may be misleading. However, there is a dearth of research comparing consumer-targeted drug advertising to evidence to evaluate whether misleading or false information is being presented in these ads.ObjectiveTo compare claims in consumer-targeted television drug advertising to evidence, in order to evaluate the frequency of false or misleading television drug advertising targeted to consumers.DesignA content analysis of a cross-section of television advertisements for prescription and nonprescription drugs aired from 2008 through 2010. We analyzed commercial segments containing prescription and nonprescription drug advertisements randomly selected from the Vanderbilt Television News Archive, a census of national news broadcasts.Main measuresFor each advertisement, the most-emphasized claim in each ad was identified based on claim iteration, mode of communication, duration and placement. This claim was then compared to evidence by trained coders, and categorized as being objectively true, potentially misleading, or false. Potentially misleading claims omitted important information, exaggerated information, made lifestyle associations, or expressed opinions. False claims were factually false or unsubstantiated.Key resultsOf the most emphasized claims in prescription (n = 84) and nonprescription (n = 84) drug advertisements, 33 % were objectively true, 57 % were potentially misleading and 10 % were false. In prescription drug ads, there were more objectively true claims (43 %) and fewer false claims (2 %) than in nonprescription drug ads (23 % objectively true, 7 % false). There were similar numbers of potentially misleading claims in prescription (55 %) and nonprescription (61 %) drug ads.ConclusionsPotentially misleading claims are prevalent throughout consumer-targeted prescription and nonprescription drug advertising on television. These results are in conflict with proponents who argue the social value of drug advertising is found in informing consumers about drugs.

Dataset Information

Direct-to-Consumer Promotion of Prescription Drugs on Mobile Devices: Content Analysis.

Publications

Direct-to-Consumer Promotion of Prescription Drugs on Mobile Devices: Content Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets