ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2007
Promotional methods used by representatives of drug companies: a prospective survey in general practice.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ask a Doctor a Question: A Clinician's Message to the Industry.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Innovation, advertising, personal selling, and sustainability in the industries massively benefited from major public health emergencies: paradoxical evidence from China.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Influence of Sales Promotion Techniques on Consumers' Purchasing Decisions at Community Pharmacies.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Seeding trials: Marketing gimmick or credible scientific research.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2019Article
- Knowledge levels of pharmaceutical sales representatives in pain therapy: a descriptive questionnaire-based study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2012Article
- GPs' opinions of public and industrial information regarding drugs: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2011Article
- Dose adjustment of antidiabetic medications in chronic kidney disease.Avicenna journal of medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the extent and composition of pharmaceutical industry representatives' marketing techniques with a particular focus on drug sampling in relation to drug age.
designA group of 47 GPs prospectively collected data on drug promotional activities during a six-month period, and a sub-sample of 10 GPs furthermore recorded the representatives' marketing techniques in detail.
settingPrimary healthcare. SUBJECTS: General practitioners in the County of Funen, Denmark.
main outcome measuresPromotional visits and corresponding marketing techniques.
resultsThe 47 GPs recorded 1050 visits corresponding to a median of 19 (range 3 to 63) per GP in the six months. The majority of drugs promoted (52%) were marketed more than five years ago. There was a statistically significant decline in the proportion of visits where drug samples were offered with drug age, but the decline was small OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.95;0.98) per year. Leaflets (68%), suggestions on how to improve therapy for a specific patient registered with the practice (53%), drug samples (48%), and gifts (36%) were the most frequently used marketing techniques.
conclusionDrug-industry representatives use a variety of promotional methods. The tendency to hand out drug samples was statistically significantly associated with drug age, but the decline was small.
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.