The Suboptimal Legibility of Prescribing Information in Pharmaceutical Advertisements

Lohiya, Sapna

doi:10.3122/jabfm.2007.03.060169

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding was similar to that of study by Lohiya. [ 23 ] Also, 60% of it spared just less than 10% of total area with the mean of 4.08% for presenting this important information. Use of such a negligible area for BPI made this information poorly legible on the contrary brand names and claims were displayed in the bold so as to make an impact.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of rationality of promotional drug literature using World Health Organization guidelines

Mali

Dudhgaonkar

Bachewar³

2010

Indian J Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The study was aimed to evaluate collected drug promotional brochures for accuracy, consistency, and validity of the information presented in it, using World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for ethical medicinal drug promotion. Drug promotional brochures were evaluated for the type of claims and pictorial content presented in it and for references cited in support of these claims.Material and Methods:This observational, cross-sectional study was conducted in the outpatient department of Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur, India. In addition to the fulfillment of “WHO criteria, 1988,” we examined 513 promotional brochures for the type of claims and pictorial content presented in it and references quoted in support of claims to check their retrievability, type, and authenticity.Results:None of the promotional literature fulfilled all WHO criteria. Majority (92%) brochures claimed about the efficacy of product, and a few about safety (37.8%). Out of 1003 references given in support of various claims, 84.4% were from journals and only 28.5% were validly presented researches. Brochures presenting irrelevant pictures were 41.3%, whereas brief prescription information (BPI) of the promoted drug was given only by 8.8% brochures.Conclusion:Pharmaceutical industries did not follow the WHO guidelines while promoting their products, thus aiming to satisfying their commercial motive rather than fulfill the educational aspect of promotion.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of rationality of promotional drug literature using World Health Organization guidelines

Mali

Dudhgaonkar

Bachewar³

2010

Indian J Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[2,3,13] We also evaluated that statistical representation of data related to the drug under promotion was given in only 7% of literatures, and tabular representation of the same was given in only 5% of literatures, which are important aspects of safety of drug. In this study, references were cited in 67% of the collected literatures only, showing that 33% of them not even think that references should support their claims.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%