Presenting efficacy information in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertisements

Attention to risk information in direct-to-consumer prescription drug print ads: An eye-tracking study

PURPOSE

FDA regulations state print ads for prescription drugs must provide a true statement of information "in brief summary" describing "side effects, contraindications and effectiveness." To fulfill these requirements, these ads typically display risk information both as important safety information (ISI) on the "main" ad page with the product claims and on a separate "brief summary" page. The ISI can be lengthy and may repeat brief summary content.

METHODS

The authors tested two versions of the ISI (short versus long) and the presence or absence of a brief summary in direct-to-consumer prescription drug print ads for two medical conditions: overactive bladder (N = 181) and rheumatoid arthritis (N = 179). Attention was measured with eye-tracking and self-report methods. Risk retention and perceptions were self-reported.

RESULTS

Participants spent more time viewing ads with a long ISI or a brief summary and in some instances, recalled more risks. The combination of a long ISI and a brief summary did not increase or decrease attention to or retention of risk information.

CONCLUSION

A long ISI and a brief summary may perform similar functions.

A scoping review of empirical research on prescription drug promotion

BACKGROUND

Pharmaceutical spending on prescription drug promotion is considerable, and exposure to advertising can influence demand and behavior. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) provides industry guidance to help ensure that communications to consumers and health care providers about prescription drug promotion are truthful, balanced, and accurately communicated. As empirical research has accelerated on this topic in the past decade, an understanding of the current landscape of the science will help inform future research.

OBJECTIVES

Using systematic methods, this rigorous scoping review of the literature over the past decade (2012-2021) (1) examined the extent to which prescription drug promotion has been empirically investigated with consumers, patients, and health care providers; (2) examined the extent to which content and features of prescription drug promotion have been empirically investigated; and (3) identified themes across the literature to better understand the current landscape of prescription drug promotion.

METHODS

Databases searched include PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, Business Source Corporate, Communication Source, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for original research published in English from January 1, 2012, through November 10, 2021, using terms related to direct-to-consumer advertising, prescription drugs, and outcomes of interest (e.g., attitudes, perceptions, intentions, behaviors).

RESULTS

Of 804 screened references, 151 studies addressed the first research question, and 40 studies addressed the second. The most common theme across the body of evidence focused on testing of features and content in prescription drug promotional materials (84), followed by studies examining attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors toward prescription drug promotion more generally (43). Some (27) studies focused on targeted populations, such as patients, the elderly, non-English speaking people or individuals of a non-white race/ethnicity. Twenty-four studies assessed influence of exposure to prescription drug promotion on actual clinical outcomes, while 11 studies examined emerging technologies around prescription drug promotion. Seven studies evaluated the extent to which prescription drug promotion complied with existing guidelines and requirements.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this scoping review suggest there has been an increase in the number of empirical studies conducted on prescription drug promotion over the past decade. Potential areas that warrant further study include examination of emerging technologies, an expanded focus on targeted populations, and construct measurement.

Optimistic Bias and Consumer Prescription Drug Decisions: Influences of Direct to Consumer Advertising and Perceived Susceptibility

This study examines how optimistic bias moderates the association of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising (DTCA) exposure with consumers' responses to DTCA. We propose and test a model that addresses how exposure to DTCA plays a role in health risk assessment and prescription drug decision engagement. Findings from an online survey of U.S. adults (n = 628) demonstrated that exposure to DTCA is positively associated with consumers' perceived susceptibility and negatively associated with optimistic bias about health risk. The relationship between DTCA exposure and prescription decision engagement was mediated through perceived susceptibility, and this process was moderated by optimistic bias. The study's theoretical implications are discussed along with its consumer and public health implications.

Maintaining a Fair Balance? Narrative and Non-Narrative Strategies in Televised Direct-to-Consumer Advertisements for Prescription Drugs Aired in the United States, 2003-2016

Televised direct-to-consumer advertising for prescription drugs (hereafter DTCA) are among the most widespread forms of health communication encountered by American adults. DTCA shape public understanding of health problems and support the commercial interests of pharmaceutical companies by offering prescription drugs as a treatment option. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires DTCA to present fair and balanced information regarding drug benefits versus risks. While narrative persuasion theory suggests that narratives can enhance persuasion by facilitating message processing and reducing counter-arguing, prior assessments of the balance between drug benefits versus risk information in DTCA have largely overlooked whether the ads employ narratives and/or other evidentiary strategies that may confer a persuasive advantage. This study content analyzed narrativity in DTCA aired on television between 2003 and 2016 for four different health conditions (heart disease, diabetes, depression, and osteoarthritis). Results showed that while televised DTCA spent more time discussing drug risks than drug benefits, both narratives and factual evidence were more frequently used to communicate drug benefits than drug risks. These findings raise concerns that narratives are strategically used by DTCA to highlight drug benefits rather than drug risks, which could lead to inaccurate perceptions of drug risks among viewers.

Visual images of prescription drug benefits in direct-to-consumer television advertisements

OBJECTIVE

Images demonstrating a prescription drug's efficacy are often included in direct-to-consumer television advertisements. The current research assessed whether exaggerated efficacy images can mislead individuals, and whether providing accurate quantitative information can reduce these misperceptions.

METHODS

We conducted two experimental studies with internet panelists 60 years and older testing drug efficacy images in television ads for wet age-related macular degeneration (N = 901) and plaque psoriasis (N = 902). In each study, participants viewed one of six ads that varied in the efficacy images included (no image, accurate image, exaggerated image) and the presentation of quantitative information (absent, present). Measures included recall, perceptions, and numeracy.

RESULTS

In both studies, participants who saw exaggerated images were more likely than those who saw no image or accurate images to overestimate efficacy. Presenting quantitative information increased participants' gist and verbatim recall of drug efficacy, and in some cases, led participants to have more accurate perceptions of the drug's efficacy even in the presence of exaggerated images. Higher numeracy was associated with better gist and verbatim recall.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support visual persuasion theory. Moreover, they show that exaggerating benefits visually can mislead viewers.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Stakeholders should ensure that images in direct-to-consumer promotion are accurate and non-misleading.

Assessing the Inclusion of Foil Items in a Scale to Measure Recognition of Health Messages

Researchers frequently measure recognition of information in health messages by presenting participants with statements that were or were not in a message and then asking them to identify which were presented and which were not. Recognition scales are then calculated by summing the correct responses to both the true items and foils, or by summing the correct responses to the true items only. We used a sequence of psychometric analyses, including factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) analysis, to evaluate two recognition measures of this type, using data from previously published studies. We found that foils are less associated with true items than true items are with one another, or more practically, that foils are less associated with the underlying dimension of interest. These results provide researchers with insight into how recognition items function, as well as a better analytic approach for use in future studies.

The FDA's Diverse and Dynamic Activities in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Advancing and Supporting Health Equity

The U.S. encompasses a heterogenous mix of people and health disparities exist for various subpopulations, such as minorities, women, people with limited English proficiency, those with low socioeconomic status, and other underserved groups. Differences in health outcomes arise in part due to inequalities and injustices rooted in biological, social, and structural factors. Because the origins of health disparities are multifactorial, the approaches to reduce, or even eliminate them, must be multifactorial as well. The social and behavioral sciences are well poised to address the myriad and complex factors that affect health outcomes, including those at the individual level (eg, individuals' behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs), the neighborhood level (eg, housing), the community level (eg, cultural values and norms), and the policy level (eg, public policies that influence healthcare funding and access to healthcare resources and educational materials). In addition, the social and behavioral sciences (1) help equip government agencies with the perspectives and tools needed to promote health equity and (2) contribute to rigorous, evidence-based solutions for public health issues, such as disparities found in childhood vaccination rates, childhood obesity, tobacco use, and access to health information technology. The FDA, in particular, actively conducts social and behavioral sciences research to guide the Agency's efforts to advance and support health equity.

Impact of direct-to-consumer drug advertising during the Super Bowl on drug utilization

BACKGROUND

Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs impacts patients' requests for medications, and clinician prescribing. However, the impact of DTCA during the Super Bowl has not been previously described.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the impact of prescription drug DTCA during the Super Bowl on drug utilization using 2014-2016 Medicare data.

METHODS

Efinaconazole was advertised during Super Bowls XLIX (02/01/2015) and L (02/07/2016). The number of prescriptions for efinaconazole and for a comparator drug, tavaborole, were calculated in 31-day intervals from July 2014-December 2016. Interrupted time-series analysis models were created to test changes in trends of prescriptions for efinaconazole and tavaborole.

RESULTS

Following Super Bowl XLIX, the number of prescriptions per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries increased by 91% for efinaconazole, and 275% for tavaborole. After Super Bowl L, the number of prescriptions increased significantly for efinaconazole (p-value<0.001), but not for tavaborole (p = 0.70). Interrupted time-series analyses estimated that, in the absence of DTCA during Super Bowl XLIX, prescriptions for efinaconazole would have increased by 40%, instead of the observed 91%. For tavaborole, prescriptions would have increased by 90% instead of 275%.

CONCLUSIONS

DTCA during the Super Bowl resulted in sharp increases in utilization of the prescription drug advertised, which supports further regulation of DTCA.

The Effect of Including Quantitative Information on Multiple Endpoints in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Television Advertisements

Background. Previous research found that adding a single piece of quantitative information about prescription drug benefits to direct-to-consumer (DTC) ads helps consumers understand how well the drug works. However, drug information often includes quantitative information on multiple benefit outcomes and risks. Thus, we examined whether consumer understanding was similarly improved when DTC television ads include varying amounts of quantitative information. Methods. We randomly assigned participants (945 Internet panelists ≥ 60 years old) to view 1 of 9 fictitious prescription drug television ads that varied the presentation of quantitative information for benefits (none, single outcome, 2 outcomes) and risks (none, 1 risk category, 3 risk categories) and then measured gist and verbatim recall/estimation and drug perceptions. Results. Adding a single benefit outcome and a single risk category replicated past results. Compared with an ad containing no quantitative information, presenting 2 benefit outcomes and multiple risk categories increased gist and verbatim recall and affected drug perceptions. Compared with presenting a single benefit outcome, presenting 2 benefit outcomes increased verbatim recall for the second outcome but decreased verbatim recall for the first outcome. Likewise, compared with presenting a single risk category, presenting multiple risk categories increased gist and verbatim recall for the multiple risk categories but decreased gist recall for a concept more closely associated with the single risk category. Adding multiple risk categories decreased risk perceptions even more than did the single risk category. Limitations. This study may have limited generalizability because it examined an ad for only 1 medical condition. Conclusions. There are tradeoffs to adding multiple quantitative benefit outcomes in DTC ads. However, presenting multiple quantitative risk categories helps consumers better understand a drug's risks.

Taking Repeated Exposure into Account: An Experimental Study of Direct-To-Consumer Prescription Drug Television Ad Effects

Introduction: Little is known about how repeated exposure to direct-to-consumer prescription drug promotion can impact consumers' retention and perceptions of drug information. The study described here tested the effects of varied ad exposure frequency on these outcomes. Methods: In an in-person experiment, participants with seasonal allergies (n = 616) were randomized to view a mock prescription drug television ad either once, twice, or four times within 1 h of television programming, embedded with six commercial breaks. Respondents then answered a 20-min survey administered via computer. Results: Those who viewed the ad more frequently were better able to recall both risk (X² = 20.93, p < .001) and benefit information (X² = 9.34, p = .009) and to recognize risk (F(2,597) = 11.89, p = .001) and benefit information (F(2,597) = 3.17, p = .043) than those who viewed the ad one time. Ad exposure frequency was not associated with perceptions about the magnitude or likelihood of risks or benefits. In general, risk information seemed to require more repetitions than benefit information to be accurately remembered. The recall was mediated by elaborate processing. Discussion: Effects on memory were small; retention of both risks and benefits remained low overall even after four exposures.

Consumer tradeoff of advertising claim versus efficacy information in direct-to-consumer prescription drug ads

BACKGROUND

Consumers' decision making about prescription drugs may be influenced by more than thoughts about drug efficacy and the potential for side effects. Choices may be based on tradeoffs among multiple factors, for example, medical condition, risk severity, risk likelihood, product efficacy, and resources. Some information used in tradeoff choices might be derived from marketing efforts by drug manufacturers. How market claims, such as "#1 Prescribed" may affect this tradeoff is an area that has yet to be explored fully.

OBJECTIVE

Using conjoint analysis techniques, this research examined the tradeoff of market claim and efficacy information in direct-to-consumer (DTC) print advertising for prescription drugs.

METHODS

Two hundred fifteen adult participants with a self-reported diagnosis of diabetes were recruited through an online consumer panel. Participants were presented a series of choices. Each choice pair represented a prescription diabetic nerve pain drug with a different efficacy level and one of the two had a market claim of "#1 Prescribed". Participants indicated which drug they would prefer if they had to choose one. Results showed an advantage of #1 Prescribed. A drug without this claim needed at least 1.23% greater efficacy to be chosen over a drug with this claim.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings align with previous research which found that extrinsic cues can influence consumer product choice, which has implications for optimal medication use.

Communicating Risk Information in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Television Ads: A Content Analysis

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) television ads for prescription drugs are required to disclose the product's major risks in the audio or audio and visual parts of the presentation (sometimes referred to as the "major statement"). The objective of this content analysis was to determine how the major statement of risks is presented in DTC television ads, including what risk information is presented, how easy or difficult it is to understand the risk information, and the audio and visual characteristics of the major statement. We identified 68 DTC television ads for branded prescription drugs, which included a unique major statement and that aired between July 2012 and August 2014. We used subjective and objective measures to code 50 ads randomly selected from the main sample. Major statements often presented numerous risks, usually in order of severity, with no quantitative information about the risks' severity or prevalence. The major statements required a high school reading level, and many included long and complex sentences. The major statements were often accompanied by competing non-risk information in the visual images, presented with moderately fast-paced music, and read at a faster pace than benefit information. Overall, we discovered several ways in which the communication of risk information could be improved.

Medical Marketing in the United States, 1997-2016

IMPORTANCE

Manufacturers, companies, and health care professionals and organizations use an array of promotional activities to sell and increase market share of their products and services. These activities seek to shape public and clinician beliefs about laboratory testing, the benefits and harms of prescription drugs, and some disease definitions.

OBJECTIVE

To review the marketing of prescription drugs, disease awareness campaigns, health services, and laboratory tests and the related consequences and regulation in the United States over a 20-year period (1997-2016).

EVIDENCE

Analysis (1997-2016) of consumer advertising (Kantar Media data for spending and number of ads); professional marketing (IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science, Open Payments Data [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services]); regulations and legal actions of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Federal Trade Commission (FTC), state attorneys general, and US Department of Justice; and searches (1975-2018) of peer-reviewed medical literature (PubMed), business journals (Business Source Ultimate), and news media (Lexis Nexis) for articles about expenditures, content, and consequences and regulation of consumer and professional medical marketing. Spending is reported in 2016 dollars.

FINDINGS

From 1997 through 2016, spending on medical marketing of drugs, disease awareness campaigns, health services, and laboratory testing increased from $17.7 to $29.9 billion. The most rapid increase was in direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising, which increased from $2.1 billion (11.9%) of total spending in 1997 to $9.6 billion (32.0%) of total spending in 2016. DTC prescription drug advertising increased from $1.3 billion (79 000 ads) to $6 billion (4.6 million ads [including 663 000 TV commercials]), with a shift toward advertising high-cost biologics and cancer immunotherapies. Pharmaceutical companies increased DTC marketing about diseases treated by their drugs with increases in disease awareness campaigns from 44 to 401 and in spending from $177 million to $430 million. DTC advertising for health services increased from $542 million to $2.9 billion, with the largest spending increases by hospitals, dental centers, cancer centers, mental health and addiction clinics, and medical services (eg, home health). DTC spending on advertising for laboratory tests (such as genetic testing) increased from $75.4 million to $82.6 million, although the number of ads increased more substantially (from 14 100 to 255 300), reflecting an increase in less expensive electronic media advertising. Marketing to health care professionals by pharmaceutical companies accounted for most promotional spending and increased from $15.6 billion to $20.3 billion, including $5.6 billion for prescriber detailing, $13.5 billion for free samples, $979 million for direct physician payments (eg, speaking fees, meals) related to specific drugs, and $59 million for disease education. Manufacturers of FDA-approved laboratory tests paid $12.9 million to professionals in 2016. From 1997 through 2016, the number of consumer and professional drug promotional materials that companies submitted for FDA review increased from 34 182 to 97 252, while FDA violation letters for misleading drug marketing decreased from 156 to 11. Since 1997, 103 financial settlements between drug companies and federal and state governments resulted in more than $11 billion in fines for off-label or deceptive marketing practices. The FTC has acted against misleading marketing by a single for-profit cancer center.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Medical marketing increased substantially from 1997 through 2016, especially DTC advertising for prescription drugs and health services. Pharmaceutical marketing to health professionals accounted for most spending and remains high even with new policies to limit industry influence. Despite the increase in marketing over 20 years, regulatory oversight remains limited.

Assessing hearing and cognition challenges in consumer processing of televised risk information: Validation of self-reported measures using performance indicators

Public health researchers face important challenges if they wish to include measures of hearing or cognitive ability in risk communication studies. We sought validity evidence for self-report measures of hearing and cognitive ability by comparing those measures to performance-based measures and risk information recall. We measured hearing ability (with audiologist-assisted assessment and self report), cognitive ability (with an established performance task and self report), and reactions to direct-to-consumer prescription drug promotion with adults 18 and older (n = 1064) in North Carolina, USA, in 2017. We found moderate correspondence between self-reported hearing loss and audiologist-assessed hearing loss. Both measures also showed a small negative association with recall of presented risk information. Cognitive ability results suggested less substantial correspondence between self report and performance task and the measures differed in predicting risk recall. Our results suggested a moderately efficient measure for hearing ability for research on risk information exposure and retention, and yet also suggested the need for caution regarding future use of self-reported cognitive ability as a substitute for a performance-based measure.

Best Methods of Communicating Clinical Trial Data to Improve Understanding of Treatments for Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Patients' understanding of treatment risks and benefits is a prerequisite for shared decision making. Yet, patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) do not accurately understand treatment information provided in regular clinical consultations.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the best methods of communicating clinical trial data to improve the understanding of treatments among patients with MS and to also examine the relationship between patients' understanding with decisional conflict, individual traits, and MS symptoms.

METHODS

A repeated-measures study was used. A sample of relapsing-remitting patients with MS was recruited from National Health Service sites in the United Kingdom. Patients were presented with hypothetical treatment risks and benefits from faux clinical trials. Treatments were communicated using absolute terms, relative terms, and numbers needed to treat/harm. The presence of baseline information with each method was also manipulated. Patients' understanding and conflict in treatment decisions were assessed. Individual traits and MS symptoms were also recorded.

RESULTS

Understanding was better when treatments were communicated in absolute terms (mean 3.99 ± 0.93) compared with relative terms (mean 2.93 ± 0.91; P < 0.001) and numbers needed to treat/harm (mean 2.89 ± 0.88; P < 0.001). Adding baseline information to all methods significantly improved understanding (mean 5.04 ± 0.96) compared with no baseline information (mean 1.50 ± 0.74; P < 0.001). Understanding was not related to conflict in treatment decisions (r = -0.131; P = 0.391). Numeracy, IQ, and cognitive impairments were significantly related to patients' understanding of treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment risks and benefits should ideally be communicated using absolute terms, alongside baseline information. Patients with MS with low numeracy, low IQ, and reduced cognitive skills should be supported during treatment education.

Attention to and Distraction from Risk Information in Prescription Drug Advertising: An Eye Tracking Study

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) television ads must disclose a drug's most important risks. Currently, the risks must be in audio at a minimum. Studies have shown that presenting information with both audio and superimposed risk text (dual-modality) improves recall beyond that of using audio alone. However, distracting elements in DTC ads may draw attention away from the superimposed risk text. This study combined eye-tracking data with questionnaire data to examine whether distracting elements decrease attention to the risk text in DTC ads, in turn affecting risk retention and risk perceptions. The authors randomly assigned 300 U.S. opt-in panel members to view either a low-distraction or a high-distraction DTC television ad. The authors found that distracting elements during risk presentation drew attention away from the risk text and, in turn, reduced retention of drug risk information. Risk perceptions were not affected. These results suggest that even if dual-modality is used to increase consumer's comprehension of drug risk information, distracting visuals should still be avoided in order to help consumers focus on key information in the ad.

Placement and Format of Risk Information on Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Websites

We investigated whether the location and format of risk information on branded prescription drug websites influence consumers' knowledge and perceptions of the drug's risks. Participants (Internet panelists with high cholesterol [n = 2,609] or seasonal allergies [n = 2,637]) were randomly assigned to view a website promoting a fictitious prescription drug for their condition. The website presented risk information at the bottom of the homepage, or at the bottom of the homepage with a signal above indicating that the risk information was located below, or on a linked secondary page. We also varied the format of risk information (paragraph, checklist, bulleted list, highlighted box). Participants then answered questions on risk recall and perceptions. Participants recalled fewer drug risks when the risks were placed on a secondary page. The signal had little effect, and risk information format did not affect outcomes. The location of risk information on prescription drug websites can affect consumer knowledge of drug risks; however, signals and special formatting may not be necessary for websites to adequately inform consumers about drug risks. We recommend that prescription drug websites maintain risk information on their homepages to achieve "fair balance" as required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Are Disease Awareness Links on Prescription Drug Websites Misleading? A Randomized Study

We sought to determine whether links from branded prescription drug websites to websites containing disease information mislead participants about drug benefits and whether nonsponsorship disclosures diminish this potential effect. We randomly assigned online panelists with depression (N = 1,071) to view a fictitious prescription drug website that had (a) no link to a disease information website (control), (b) a link with no disclosure, (c) a link with a simple nonsponsorship disclosure, or (d) a link with a detailed nonsponsorship disclosure. If participants in the link conditions did not click the link, they were returned to the drug website and encouraged to click it. All participants then completed an online questionnaire assessing recall, perceptions, and intentions. Few participants (12%) clicked the link without prompting; 67% did so when prompted. Compared with control participants, participants in link conditions were more likely to confuse disease information with drug benefits and to recall fewer true drug benefits. Disclosures did not diminish these effects, and exposure to disease information did not affect other perceptions or intentions. Consumers seem to confuse information on disease websites with information on branded prescription drug websites. Disclosures may not adequately help consumers to distinguish between the 2 types of information.

Consumers' Understanding of FDA Approval Requirements and Composite Scores in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Print Ads

In 2 studies, we investigated how laypersons perceive the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process, FDA authority, and the presentation of composite scores in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug print ads. The 1st study consisted of 4 focus groups (N = 38) in 2 cities. Using a semi-structured guide, a moderator led participants through the viewing of 3 existing DTC print ads that differed in the presence or absence of composite score information, and participants discussed their views of the ads and their understanding of composite scores. The 2nd study surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,629 individuals from the general population who saw a fictitious DTC print ad and answered closed-ended questions about the same topics. Results showed that knowledge of FDA approval and authority was mixed, with several misconceptions apparent. Many consumers were not familiar with the use of composite scores in a medical context or in advertising and, in the 1st study, expressed distrust of the product and the ad after learning about how composite scores are used. In the 2nd study, receiving composite score information changed the perceived clarity of the ad but not the perceived risk or benefits. Implications for the presentation of complex medical information are discussed.

Visual presentations of efficacy data in direct-to-consumer prescription drug print and television advertisements: A randomized study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether visual aids help people recall quantitative efficacy information in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertisements, and if so, which types of visual aids are most helpful.

METHODS

Individuals diagnosed with high cholesterol (n=2504) were randomized to view a fictional DTC print or television advertisement with no visual aid or one of four visual aids (pie chart, bar chart, table, or pictograph) depicting drug efficacy. We measured drug efficacy and risk recall, drug perceptions and attitudes, and behavioral intentions.

RESULTS

For print advertisements, a bar chart or table, compared with no visual aid, elicited more accurate drug efficacy recall. The bar chart was better at this than the pictograph and the table was better than the pie chart. For television advertisements, any visual aid, compared with no visual aid, elicited more accurate drug efficacy recall. The bar chart was better at this than the pictograph or the table.

CONCLUSION

Visual aids depicting quantitative efficacy information in DTC print and television advertisements increased drug efficacy recall, which may help people make informed decisions about prescription drugs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Adding visual aids to DTC advertising may increase the public's knowledge of how well prescription drugs work.

Communicating efficacy information based on composite scores in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising

OBJECTIVE

Drug efficacy can be measured by composite scores, which consist of two or more symptoms or other clinical components of a disease. We evaluated how individuals interpret composite scores in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertising.

METHODS

We conducted an experimental study of seasonal allergy sufferers (n=1967) who viewed a fictitious print DTC ad that varied by the type of information featured (general indication, list of symptoms, or definition of composite scores) and the presence or absence of an educational intervention about composite scores. We measured composite score recognition and comprehension, and perceived drug efficacy and risk.

RESULTS

Ads that featured either (1) the composite score definition alone or (2) the list of symptoms or general indication information along with the educational intervention improved composite score comprehension. Ads that included the composite score definition or the educational intervention led to lower confidence in the drug's benefits. The composite score definition improved composite score recognition and lowered drug risk perceptions.

CONCLUSION

Adding composite score information to DTC print ads may improve individuals' comprehension of composite scores and affect their perceptions of the drug.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Providing composite score information may lead to more informed patient-provider prescription drug decisions.

An Empirical Examination of the FDAAA-Mandated "Toll-Free Statement" for Consumer Reporting of Side Effects in Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertisements

We investigated how inclusion of a "toll-free statement" for reporting side effects to FDA in prescription drug direct-to-consumer (DTC) television ads affects comprehension of product risks and benefits, and comprehension of and memory for the toll-free statement itself. Participants viewed one of nine mock prescription drug television ads that varied elements of the toll-free statement, and then responded to a questionnaire. Presenting the statement in both text and audio resulted in better processing of the statement compared to only text. When shown in text alone, presenting the statement during the entire advertisement or after the statement of risks resulted in better processing of the statement compared to placement before the presentation of risk information. The placement, duration, or prominence of the statement did not affect comprehension of product risk and benefit information. Our findings suggest that the toll-free statement can be added to DTC television ads without significantly affecting comprehension of product risk and benefit information, and that select presentations are preferable for communicating the toll-free statement. The appropriate inclusion of the toll-free statement in DTC television ads may increase the visibility of the adverse event reporting system, without any apparent cost to the understanding of benefits and risks.

Communicating Benefit and Risk Information in Direct-to-Consumer Print Advertisements: A Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

Previous research demonstrated that providing qualitative and quantitative information in a "drug facts box" may help individuals understand prescription drug information in print-based direct-to-consumer advertisements. The authors sought to determine whether qualitative, quantitative, or a combination thereof best communicates benefit and risk information.

METHODS

To replicate and extend previous research, the authors used simple quantitative drug information. A randomized controlled study was conducted with 5067 Internet panelists with heartburn. Participants viewed a drug facts box with benefit and risk information that varied the presence or absence of qualitative summaries and absolute frequencies, percentages, and absolute differences. Measures included knowledge of drug benefits and risks, perceptions, and intentions.

RESULTS

Providing absolute frequencies and percentages most improved participants' drug knowledge and affected perceptions and intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings suggest that, for simple drug information, adding absolute frequencies and percentages to direct-to-consumer advertisements may benefit consumers. Absolute differences and qualitative labels may not be needed.

Randomized study of placebo and framing information in direct-to-consumer print advertisements for prescription drugs

BACKGROUND

Research suggests that quantitative information in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug ads may be helpful for consumers.

PURPOSE

The objective was to examine the effect of adding placebo rates and framing to DTC ads.

METHODS

In study 1, 2,000 Internet panel members with chronic pain participated in a randomized controlled experiment of DTC ads varying in placebo rate and framing. In study 2, 596 physicians ranked DTC ads varying in placebo rate and framing by how well they conveyed scientific information and their usefulness for patients.

RESULTS

In study 1, participants who viewed placebo rates were able to recall them and use them to form certain perceptions. A mixed frame led to lower placebo rate recall and perceived efficacy. In study 2, overall, physicians preferred a placebo/single frame ad.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding placebo rates to DTC ads may be useful for consumers. The evidence does not support using a mixed frame.

Do Prescription Drug Ads Tell Consumers Enough About Benefits and Side Effects? Results From the Health Information National Trends Survey, Fourth Administration

Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising (DTCA) is a major source of consumer information about prescription drugs. The present study updates 2002 U.S. Food and Drug Administration phone survey questions that found that 44% and 61% of consumers thought that DTCA did not include enough information about benefits and risks, respectively. The present study was administered by mail using a nationally representative sample, and provides a more in-depth understanding of how these beliefs relate to demographic and health characteristics. Data collected from 3,959 respondents to the National Cancer Institute's 2011 Health Information National Trends Survey find results similar to the 2002 survey: 46% and 52% of respondents thought that DCTA did not include enough information about benefits and risks, respectively. Respondents fell into four groups: 23% agreed that DTCA tells enough about drug benefits and risks, 41% disagreed, 18% expressed no opinion, and 18% had discordant beliefs. DTCA attitudes were negatively associated with education, income, and whether respondents purchase prescription drugs; attitudes were positively associated with whether respondents understand prescription drug information. This study confirms that a plurality of Americans believe that DTCA does not include enough information about benefits and risks, suggesting that the educational effect of DTCA could be improved.