Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23093880›Full record

ArticleSouthern med review2010

Assessing different perspectives on the value of a pharmaceutical innovation.

Albert Wertheimer, Larry Radican, Michael Robert Jacobs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Southern med review, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Albert WertheimerSchool of Pharmacy, Temple University, 3307 North Broad Street, Philadelphia PA 19140, USA.
Larry Radican
Michael Robert Jacobs

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Numerous pharmaceutical products are launched each year for the treatment of various medical conditions. The prescriber is in a difficult position to determine which the optimal product is for a specific patient, when he has available immediate release as well as sustained action capsules and tablets, chewable tablets and liquid dosage forms. Some have activity within 15 minutes while others take longer. Some are more costly but have never been implicated with gastric distress; some are very widely prescribed and others are not well known. Some are promoted as enhancing compliance and others for schedule simplicity.In order to make sense of the array of diverse product attributes and to determine the value associated with different dosage form features, separate panels of practicing physicians, practicing pharmacists and patients were asked to ascribe value to a list of 10 drug product features that were mentioned in drug product advertisements in medical journals, by indicating what percentage price increase that feature might merit over a basic product without that feature. In addition, the respondents were asked to rank order the mentioned product features.In all three panels, efficacy and safety were accorded the highest status. Pharmacists and patients appeared to be most welcoming of some of the listed features. This pilot study demonstrates that there appears to be a recognized value assigned to some product features and it may differ by audience.

Identifiers

PMID23093880
PMCPMC3471174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.