ArticleBMC family practice2006
A cross-sectional evidence-based review of pharmaceutical promotional marketing brochures and their underlying studies: is what they tell us important and true?
Article in BMC family practice, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pharmaceutical policies: effects of policies regulating drug marketing.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Written drug promotion from pharmaceutical companies to general practitioners: adherence to regulations over two decades.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Pharmaceutical Drug Promotion and Rational Drug Use: Assessment of Healthcare Workers Perspective.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2024Article
- Marketing of medicines in primary care: An analysis of direct marketing mailings and advertisements.PloS one · 2023Article
- Pharmaceutical brochures in Lebanon: do they meet WHO recommendations?BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Assessment of a Pharmaceutical Advertisement Analysis Module in a Drug Literature Evaluation Course.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2017Article
- Qualitative insights into promotion of pharmaceutical products in Bangladesh: how ethical are the practices?BMC medical ethics · 2015Observational
- Analysis of written advertising material distributed through community pharmacies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Pharmacy practice · 2013Article
- An analysis of the warning letters issued by the FDA to pharmaceutical manufacturers regarding misleading health outcomes claims.Pharmacy practice · 2012Article
- Ethical issues in new drug prescribing.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2012Article
- Drug promotional literature distributed by pharmaceutical companies: Do they provide enough information to ascertain their validity?Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics · 2011Article
- Evaluation of rationality of promotional drug literature using World Health Organization guidelines.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2010Article
- Regurgitation of my free lunch: the clinical toxicology and pharmaceutical company relationship.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2009Article
- Is availability of endoscopy changing initial management of vesicoureteral reflux?The Journal of urology · 2009Article
- Pharmaceutical company influence on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug prescribing behaviors.The American journal of managed care · 2009Article
- Accuracy of drug advertisements in medical journals under new law regulating the marketing of pharmaceutical products in Switzerland.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2008Article
- Do advertisements for antihypertensive drugs in Australia promote quality prescribing? A cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2008Article
- Soft targets: nurses and the pharmaceutical industry.PLoS medicine · 2008Review
- Information provided by generic and brand-name pharmaceutical manufacturers in response to a request.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2007Article
- Overcoming obstacles to implementing a primary care research framework.Osteopathic medicine and primary care · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA major marketing technique used by pharmaceutical companies is direct-to-physician marketing. This form of marketing frequently employs promotional marketing brochures, based on clinical research, which may influence how a physician prescribes medicines. This study's objective was to investigate whether or not the information in promotional brochures presented to physicians by pharmaceutical representatives is accurate, consistent, and valid with respect to the actual studies upon which the promotional brochures are based.
methodsPhysicians in five clinics were asked to consecutively collect pharmaceutical promotional brochures and to send them all to a centralized location. The brochures for any class of medication were collected on a continuous basis until 20 distinct promotional brochures were received by a central location. Once the brochure was received, the corresponding original study was obtained. Two blinded reviewers performed an evidence-based review of the article, comparing data that was printed on the brochure to what was found in the original study.
resultsAmong the 20 studies, 75% of the studies were found to be valid, 80% were funded by the pharmaceutical company, 60% of the studies and the corresponding brochures presented patient-oriented outcomes, and 40% were compared to another treatment regimen. Of the 19 brochures that presented the data as graphs, 4 brochures presented a relative risk reduction while only 1 brochure presented an absolute risk reduction. 15% of the promotional marketing brochures presented data that was different from what was in the original published study.
conclusionGiven the present findings, physicians should be cautious about drawing conclusions regarding a medication based on the marketing brochures provided by pharmaceutical companies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.