ArticlePloS one2016
Prescription Drug Promotion from 2001-2014: Data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Article in PloS one, 2016. 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.
- Placement and Format of Risk Information on Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Websites.Journal of health communication · 2017Trial
- Complexity of Data Displays in Prescription Drug Advertisements for Healthcare Providers.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2023Article
- Financial conflicts of interest between pharmaceutical companies and the authors of urology clinical practice guidelines in Japan.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Disclosing accelerated approval on direct-to-consumer prescription drug websites.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2018Article
- Drug promotion practices: A review.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Review
- Testimonials and Informational Videos on Branded Prescription Drug Websites: Experimental Study to Assess Influence on Consumer Knowledge and Perceptions.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- Consumers' experience with and attitudes toward direct-to-consumer prescription drug promotion: a nationally representative survey.Health marketing quarterlyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The volume of prescription drug promotion over time is often measured by assessing changes in ad spending. However, this method obscures the fact that some types of advertising are more expensive than others. Another way to measure the changes in prescription drug promotion over time is to assess the number of promotional pieces submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Form FDA 2253 collects information such as the date submitted and the type of material submitted. We analyzed data from Forms FDA 2253 received from 2001-2014. We examined the frequency of submissions by audience (consumer and healthcare professional) and type of promotional material. There was a noted increase in prescription drug promotion submissions across all media in the early 2000s. Although non-Internet promotion submissions have since plateaued, Internet promotion continued to increase. These results can help public health advocates and regulators focus attention and resources.
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.