ArticleJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
Physicians' Understanding of Clinical Trial Data in Professional Prescription Drug Promotion.
Article in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physician Interpretation of Data of Uncertain Clinical Utility in Oncology Prescription Drug Promotion.The oncologist · 2021Trial
- Healthcare providers' understanding of data displays of clinical trial information: a scoping review of the literature.Journal of communication in healthcare · 2023Article
- Complexity of Data Displays in Prescription Drug Advertisements for Healthcare Providers.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2023Article
- Reading Between the Lines: Navigating Nuance in Medical Literature to Optimize Clinical Decision-Making and Health Care Outcomes.Advances in medical education and practice · 2023Review
- Influence of data disclosures on physician decisions about off-label uses: findings from a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- A follow-up study on the effects of an educational intervention against pharmaceutical promotion.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrescription drug marketing to physicians often includes clinical trial data. Prior research has shown that physicians may not have the necessary knowledge to understand all clinical trial results and they can be influenced by how these results are reported. This study focused on physicians' reactions to and evaluations of clinical trial data presented in professional prescription drug promotion.
methodsWe conducted 60-minute interviews with practicing physicians across the United States (50 primary care physicians and 22 endocrinologists). Physicians viewed prescription drug promotional materials that contained clinical trial data and answered follow-up questions.
resultsPhysicians demonstrated low to moderate knowledge about clinical trial-related terms found in promotional prescription drug materials. DISCUSSION: Results from this qualitative analysis underscore a need to determine how clinical trial data in prescription drug promotional materials affect physicians' attitudes and decision making.
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.