ArticlePatient education and counseling2016
Communicating efficacy information based on composite scores in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing Health Literacy and Self-Management in Glaucoma Patients: Evidence from a Nurse-Led Educational Intervention.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The risk-value trade-off: price and brand information impact consumers' intentions to purchase OTC drugs.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2021Article
- A survey of perceptions and attitudes about direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs among college students in South Korea.PloS one · 2018Article
- Consumers' Understanding of FDA Approval Requirements and Composite Scores in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Print Ads.Journal of health communication · 2016Article
- The FDA's Diverse and Dynamic Activities in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Advancing and Supporting Health Equity.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDrug efficacy can be measured by composite scores, which consist of two or more symptoms or other clinical components of a disease. We evaluated how individuals interpret composite scores in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertising.
methodsWe conducted an experimental study of seasonal allergy sufferers (n=1967) who viewed a fictitious print DTC ad that varied by the type of information featured (general indication, list of symptoms, or definition of composite scores) and the presence or absence of an educational intervention about composite scores. We measured composite score recognition and comprehension, and perceived drug efficacy and risk.
resultsAds that featured either (1) the composite score definition alone or (2) the list of symptoms or general indication information along with the educational intervention improved composite score comprehension. Ads that included the composite score definition or the educational intervention led to lower confidence in the drug's benefits. The composite score definition improved composite score recognition and lowered drug risk perceptions.
conclusionAdding composite score information to DTC print ads may improve individuals' comprehension of composite scores and affect their perceptions of the drug. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providing composite score information may lead to more informed patient-provider prescription drug decisions.
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.