ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Social Responsibility and Misleading Advertising of Health Products on the Radio. The Opinion of the Professionals.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting Sports Betting Intentions Among Adolescents: Gender-Specific Pathways in the Reasoned Action Approach.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Article
- Why do consumers choose private over public health services? Reflective accounts of health providers in Vietnam.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Polyphenols: Natural Preservatives with Promising Applications in Food, Cosmetics and Pharma Industries; Problems and Toxicity Associated with Synthetic Preservatives; Impact of Misleading Advertisements; Recent Trends in Preservation and Legislation.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research studies the opinion of advertising professionals in agencies, on the responsibility in relation to misleading advertising of health-related products, on the medium of radio. Through a closed survey of these professionals with different types of response, dichotomous, multiple choice and Likert scale, relevant results were obtained regarding compliance and application of the law and social responsibility linked to an advertising that directly affect health. The results show that only 10% of them know the legislation, although almost 90% of those surveyed consider it necessary to have legislative knowledge, and for only half of these, is it important. A large majority assure that the health sector should be one of the most protected sectors in the advertising world and, it should be noted, that the vast majority of the professionals surveyed view the legal restrictions on advertising in the health sector as positive. There is no unanimity as to who is responsible for the message, agency or advertiser. For its part, radio is presented as one of the most serious media and less prone to misleading advertising. To conclude, it can be stated that the professionals of the agencies do not perceive the existence of misleading advertising in the health sector, neither do they consider radio as one of the media where this deception can most occur. However, they coincide in stating that the health sector is one of the most dangerous if the damage that advertising deception can cause to consumers is considered.
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.