Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29380108›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health economics and management2018

Do coverage mandates affect direct-to-consumer advertising for pharmaceuticals? Evidence from parity laws.

Robert Nathenson, Michael R Richards

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health economics and management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Robert NathensonUniversity of Pennsylvania, 3440 Market Street Suite 560, Philadelphia, PA, 19146, USA. robertna@upenn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4419-6071
Michael R RichardsDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, 2525 West End, Suite 1275, Nashville, 37203, TN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) for prescription drugs is a relatively unique feature of the US health care system and a source of tens of billions of dollars in annual spending. It has also garnered the attention of researchers and policymakers interested in its implications for firm and consumer behavior. However, few economic studies have explored the DTCA response to public policies, especially those mandating coverage of these products. We use detailed advertising expenditure data to assess if pharmaceutical firms increase their marketing efforts after the implementation of relevant state and federal health insurance laws. We focus on mental health parity statutes and related drug therapies-a potentially ripe setting for inducing stronger consumer demand. We find no clear indication that firms expect greater value from DTCA after these regulatory changes. DTCA appears driven by other considerations (e.g., product debut); however, it remains a possibility that firms respond to these laws through other, unobserved channels (e.g., provider detailing).

Indexed as

Anti-Anxiety AgentsAntidepressive AgentsDirect-to-Consumer AdvertisingDrug IndustryHumansMental Health ServicesPolicyPrescription DrugsAnti-Anxiety AgentsAntidepressive AgentsPrescription DrugsDirect-to-consumer advertisingInsurance regulationMental health parityPharmaceutical advertising

Identifiers

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.