A cross-sectional evidence-based review of pharmaceutical promotional marketing brochures and their underlying studies: Is what they tell us important and true?

BMC Family Practice

Volumn 7, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Cardarelli, Roberto ^a   Licciardone, John C ^a   Taylor, Lockwood G ^a  

^a University of North Texas Health Science Center   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG INFORMATION; DRUG MARKETING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PHYSICIAN; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION; VALIDITY; ADVERTIZING; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DECEPTION; DRUG SCREENING; OUTPATIENT DEPARTMENT; PEER REVIEW; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STANDARDS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADVERTISING AS TOPIC; AMBULATORY CARE FACILITIES; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DECEPTION; DRUG EVALUATION; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG INFORMATION SERVICES; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; PAMPHLETS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PHYSICIANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK REDUCTION BEHAVIOR;

EID: 33646337683     PISSN: 14712296     EISSN: 14712296     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2296-7-13     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Health IMS: Total U.S. promotional spend by type, 2004. 2005 [http://www.imshealth.com/ims/portal/front/articleC/0,2777, 6599_49695992_75406357,00.html].
2. Brody H: The company we keep: why physicians should refuse to see pharmaceutical representatives. Ann Fam Med 2005, 3:82-85.
3. Orlowski JP, Wateska L: The effects of pharmaceutical firm enticements on physician prescribing patterns. There's no such thing as a free lunch. Chest 1992, 102:270-273.
4. Figueiras A, Caamano F, Gestal-Otero JJ: Influence of physician's education, drug information and medical-care settings on the quality of drugs prescribed. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000, 56:747-753.
5. Wazana A: Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA 2000, 283:373-380.
6. Chew LD, O'Young TS, Hazlet TK, Bradley KA, Maynard C, Lessler DS: A physician survey of the effect of drug sample availability on physicians' behavior. J Gen Intern Med 2000, 15:478-483.
7. Xu KT, Moloney M, Phillips S: Economics of suboptimal drug use: cost-savings of using JNC-recommended medications for management of uncomplicated essential hypertension. Am J Manag Care 2003, 9:529-536.
8. Siegel D, Lopez J: Trends in antihypertensive drug use in the United States: do the JNC V recommendations affect prescribing? Fifth Joint National Commission on the Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. JAMA 1997, 278:1745-1748.
9. Wang TJ, Ausiello JC, Stafford RS: Trends in antihypertensive drug advertising, 1985-1996. Circulation 1999, 99:2055-2057.
10. Zweifler J, Hughes S, Schafer S, Garcia B, Grasser A, Salazar L: Are sample medicines hurting the uninsured? J Am Board Fam Pract 2002, 15:361-366.
11. Opie LH, Schall R: Evidence-based evaluation of calcium channel blockers for hypertension: equality of mortality and cardiovascular risk relative to conventional therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002, 39:315-322.
12. Peay MY, Peay ER: Innovation in high risk drug therapy. Soc Sci Med 1994, 39:39-52.
13. The Drug Promotion Database 2002 [http://www.drugpromo.info].
14. Gonul F: Promotion of prescription drugs and its impact on physicians' choice behavior. Journal of Marketing 2001, 216:79-90.
15. Hodges B: Interactions with the pharmaceutical industry: experiences and attitudes of psychiatry residents, interns and clerks. CMAJ 1995, 153:553-559.
16. Ziegler MG, Lew P, Singer BC: The accuracy of drug information from pharmaceutical sales representatives. JAMA 1995, 273:1296-1298.
17. Katz D, Caplan AL, Merz JF: All gifts large and small: toward an understanding of the ethics of pharmaceutical industry giftgiving. Am J Bioeth 2003, 3:39-46.
18. Avorn J, Chren M, Hartley R: Scientific versus commercial sources of influence on the prescribing behavior of physicians. Am J Med 1982, 73:4-8.
19. Lexchin J: Doctors and detailers: therapeutic education or pharmaceutical promotion? Int J Health Serv 1989, 19:663-679.
20. Lexchin J: Interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: what does the literature say? CMAJ 1993, 149:1401-1407.
21. Lexchin J: What information do physicians receive from pharmaceutical representatives? Can Fam Physician 1997, 43:941-945.
22. Lexchin J, Holbrook A: Methodologic quality and relevance of references in pharmaceutical advertisements in a Canadian medical journal. CMAJ 1994, 151:47-54.
23. Mapes R: Aspects of British general practitioners' prescribing. Medical Care 1977, 15:371-381.
24. Bower AD, Burkett GL: Family physicians and generic drugs: a study of recognition, information sources, prescribing attitudes, and practices. Journal of Family Practice 1987, 24:612-616.
25. Caudill TS, Lurie N, Rich EC: The influence of pharmaceutical industry advertising on physician prescribing. J Drug Issues 1992, 22:331-338.
26. Becker MH, Stolley PD, Lasagna L, McEvilla JD, Sloane LM: Differential education concerning therapeutics and resultant physician prescribing patterns. Journal of Medical Education 1972, 47:118-127.
27. Stolley PD, Becker MH, Lasagna L, McEvilla JD, Sloane LM: The relationship between physicians characteristics and prescribing appropriateness. Medical Care 1972, 10:17-28.
28. Haayer F: Rational prescribing and sources of information. Soc Sci Med 1982, 16:2017-2023.
29. Cormack MA, Howells E: Factors linked to the prescribing of benzodiazepines by general practice principals and trainees. Family Practice 1992, 9:466-471.
30. Stross JK: Information sources and clinical decisions. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1987, 2:155-159.
31. Strickland-Hodge B, Jepson MH: Identification and characterization of early and late prescribers in general practice. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 1982, 75:341-345.
32. DL S, al : Evidence-Based Medicine: How to practice and teach EBM 2nd edition. Edinburgh London, Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
33. SPSS, Inc. Chicago, Il.; 2002.
34. Byrt T, Bishop J, Carlin JB: Bias, prevalence and kappa. J Clin Epidemiol 1993, 46:423-429.
35. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV: High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990, 43:543-549.
36. RJ L, GC K: The measurement of onserver agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174.
37. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O: Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003, 326:1167-1170.
38. Cooper RJ, Schriger DL: The availability of references and the sponsorship of original research cited in pharmaceutical advertisements. CMAJ 2005, 172:487-491.
39. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, Fields KK, Bennett CL, Adams JR, Kuderer NM, Lyman GH: The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 2000, 356:635-638.
40. Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Simms RW, Fortin PR, Felson DT, Minaker KL, Chalmers TC: A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. Arch Intern Med 1994, 154:157-163.
41. Moher D, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Tugwell P, Moher M, Jones A, Pham B, Klassen TP: Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. Health Technol Assess 1999, 3:i-98.
42. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2002, 288:2981-2997.