Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24565216›Full record

ReviewBMC medical informatics and decision making2013

Media, messages, and medication: strategies to reconcile what patients hear, what they want, and what they need from medications.

Richard L Kravitz, Robert A Bell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Statins in a Distorted Mirror of Media.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2020
    Review
  6. Herbal supplements in the print media: communicating benefits and risks.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

2 authors.

Richard L Kravitz
Robert A Bell

Funding

UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR000002 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI BERGLUND, LARS F · 2012 to 2015
$12.2M
Targeted and Tailored Messages to Enhance Depression CareR01MH079387 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KRAVITZ, RICHARD L · 2007 to 2011
$3.4M
RCT of Patient, Caregiver and Physician Communication Coaching in Advanced CancerR01CA140419 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI EPSTEIN, RONALD M., KRAVITZ, RICHARD L · 2011 to 2015
$2.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1-TR000002NCI NIH HHS 5R01-CA140419NIMH NIH HHS 5R01-MH079387PHS HHS HHSA 290-2008-10015-C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past 30 years, patients' options for accessing information about prescription drugs have expanded dramatically. In this narrative review, we address four questions: (1) What information sources are patients exposed to, and are they paying attention? (2) Is the information they hear credible and accurate? (3) When patients ask for a prescription, what do they really want and need? Finally, (4) How can physicians reconcile what patients hear, want, and need? ANALYSIS: A critical synthesis of the literature is reported. Observations indicate that the public is generally aware of and attends to a growing body of health information resources, including traditional news media, advertising, and social networking. However, lay audiences often have no reliable way to assess the accuracy of health information found in the media, on the Internet, or in direct-to-consumer advertising. This inability to assess the information can lead to decision paralysis, with patients questioning what is known, what is knowable, and what their physicians know. Many patients have specific expectations for the care they wish to receive and have little difficulty making those expectations known. However, there are hazards in assuming that patients' expressed desires are direct reflections of their underlying wants or needs. In trying to reconcile patients' wants and needs for information about prescription medicines, a combination of policy and clinical initiatives may offer greater promise than either approach alone.

conclusionsPatients are bombarded by information about medicines. The problem is not a lack of information; rather, it is knowing what information to trust. Making sure patients get the medications they need and are prepared to take them safely requires a combination of policy and clinical interventions.

Indexed as

Health PromotionHumansMass MediaPatient Education as TopicPrescription DrugsPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID24565216
PMCPMC4029573

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.