corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 9215

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: Journal Article

Emmerton L, Gow DJ, Benrimoj SI.
Dimensions of pharmacists' preferences for cough and cold products
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice 1994 Oct; 3:


Abstract:

To develop a comprehensive list of potential influences on pharmacists’ preferences for non-prescription cough and cold products, qualitative methods and review of the literature were used to develop a list of 42 influences on pharmacists’ preferences for these products; a mail survey of 1200 community pharmacists followed. Sixty-six percent of pharmacists responded. Factor analysis reduced the 42 influences to 7 factors, namely, advertising (13.65%), non-scientific (product; 6.96%), non-scientific (social; 4.7%), financial (31.3%), experience/economics (2.86%), clinical (2.15%) and restriction/ingredients (1.61%) influences. It was concluded that these factors indicate the dimensions of pharmacists’ preference for non-prescription cough and cold products and may be further analyzed to determine their relative influence in explaining preference for specific products.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963