Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36072198›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Critical Appraisal of Drug Promotional Literature in Accordance With WHO Guidelines.

Sonali B Rode, Harsh V Salankar, Nilesh T Katole, Anuradha T Deshkar, Amruta A Dadmal, Shailesh V Parate

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Sonali B RodeDepartment of Pharmacology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.
Harsh V SalankarDepartment of Pharmacology, Datta Meghe Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagpur, IND.
Nilesh T KatoleDepartment of Pharmacology, Datta Meghe Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagpur, IND.
Anuradha T DeshkarDepartment of Pharmacology, Datta Meghe Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagpur, IND.
Amruta A DadmalDepartment of Clinical Research, School of Allied Health Sciences, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.
Shailesh V ParateDepartment of Forensic Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Rishikesh, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Drug promotional literature (DPL) is used as a marketing tactic to publicize the introduction of new medications. As drug companies are promoting the literature for their brand products, bias is possible. Various studies have demonstrated that printed DPLs disseminated by pharmaceutical companies are typically skewed. Material and method A prospective, observational study was carried out in the outpatient departments of a tertiary care hospital to analyze the DPL of different pharmaceutical companies using WHO criteria for "Ethical criteria for medicinal drug promotion, 1988". Results Out of 192 DPLs analyzed, information regarding the generic name, brand name, amount of active ingredient, and manufacturer name was found in all the DPLs (100%). Though therapeutic uses were mentioned in 91% of DPLs, dosage schedule (regimen) was mentioned only in 60%. Drug safety information such as the side effects and significant adverse drug reactions, precautions and warnings, contraindications, and major drug interactions were present in 24%, 36%, and 20%, respectively. Address of the manufacturer and reference to scientific literature were present only in 63% and 53% of DPLs, respectively. References mainly were from journals, present in 71% of DPLs. Most of the claims made in DPLs were regarding efficacy (73%), followed by safety (34%).  Conclusion In our study, not a single DPL fulfilled all the nine WHO criteria. A doctor should rigorously evaluate study findings before prescribing because misleading and incorrect information is now frequently found in this literature.

Indexed as

brand namedrug promotional literatureprinted materialsafety informationwho criteria

Identifiers

PMID36072198
PMCPMC9437375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.