Healthy Skepticism Library item: 5703

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: news

Leisten V, Schmieder W, Wenzel J.
Proof of effectiveness: “pharma-ads”
1993 Oct

Abstract:

Based on a realistic press schedule, four ads were tested using a split circulation and under completely “natural” reading conditions. The circulation split made it possible to create a direct comparison with a control group, similar to a “double blind” study, where the respondents of that group had no way of seeing the ads and the interviewer was not aware that there was a control group as well as a test group. As well, no other ads were run for these products either before or during the study, not even outside support through sales representatives was available. The products were all well established medications, which means that the study was not influenced by the novelty effect of a new product. Doctors remembered seeing test ads , recalled elements of the ads and could correctly identify the source of the ad. In a separate questionnaire doctors were asked if their prescribing was influenced by journal advertisements. Even in the 39% who claimed that ads did not influence them, 45% mentioned ads as a source of information.

Keywords:
*controlled trial/Germany/doctors/journal advertisements/source of information/ ad recognition/ attitude toward promotion/ATTITUDES REGARDING PROMOTION: HEALTH PROFESSIONALS/EVALUATION OF PROMOTION: JOURNAL ADVERTISEMENTS/INFLUENCE OF PROMOTION: PRESCRIBING, DRUG USE/PROMOTION AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION: DOCTORS