Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32883618›Full record

ArticleResearch in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP2021

Development and validation of prescription drug risk, efficacy, and benefit perception measures in the context of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising.

Bridget J Kelly, Douglas J Rupert, Kathryn J Aikin, Helen W Sullivan, Mihaela Johnson, Carla M Bann, Nicole Mack, Brian G Southwell, Sue West, Sarah Parvanta and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Perceptions and Preferences for Defining Biosimilar Products in Prescription Drug Promotion.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

12 authors.

Bridget J KellyRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States. Electronic address: bkelly@rti.org.
Douglas J RupertRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Kathryn J AikinU.S. Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD, 20993, United States.
Helen W SullivanU.S. Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD, 20993, United States.
Mihaela JohnsonRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Carla M BannRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Nicole MackRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Brian G SouthwellRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Sue WestRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Sarah ParvantaRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Alexander RabreRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.
Susana PeinadoRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 19104 Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, United States.

Funding

Intramural FDA HHS FD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeUnderstanding patient perceptions of prescription drug risks and benefits is an important component of determining risk-benefit tradeoffs and helping patients make informed medication decisions. However, few validated measures exist for capturing such perceptions. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate measures of perception of prescription drug risk, efficacy, and benefit.

methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study to develop and validate the measures, including three waves of quantitative testing (item nonresponse, criterion-related validity, and convergent validity). We conducted quantitative testing with a probability-based online consumer panel of U.S. adults (n = 7635), eliminating weaker items after each testing wave.

resultsUpon completion of all testing, we identified 21 validated measures that represent 11 distinct risk/benefit constructs. The final measures demonstrated face validity, convergent validity, criterion-related validity, and scale reliability in both illness and general population samples, among patients with both symptomatic and asymptomatic health conditions, and in response to both television and print direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertisements.

conclusionsOur study produced a set of items that researchers and practitioners can use to assess patient perceptions of prescription drug risk, benefit, and efficacy and to ensure greater future comparability between studies.

Indexed as

Direct-to-Consumer AdvertisingPrescription DrugsAdultAdvertisingHumansPerceptionReproducibility of ResultsPrescription DrugsEfficacy perceptionsMeasurement validationPrescription drugsRisk perceptions

Identifiers

PMID32883618
PMCPMC8842561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.