Advertising In Medical Journals Research Articles

Relationships among commercial practices and author conflicts of interest in biomedical publishing.

Recently, concerns have been raised over the potential impacts of commercial relationships on editorial practices in biomedical publishing. Specifically, it has been suggested that certain commercial relationships may make editors more open to publishing articles with author conflicts of interest (aCOI). Using a data set of 128,781 articles published in 159 journals, we evaluated the relationships among commercial publishing practices and reported author conflicts of interest. The 159 journals were grouped according to commercial biases (reprint services, advertising revenue, and ownership by a large commercial publishing firm). 30.6% (39,440) of articles were published in journals showing no evidence of evaluated commercial publishing relationships. 33.9% (43,630) were published in journals accepting advertising and reprint fees; 31.7% (40,887) in journals owned by large publishing firms; 1.2% (1,589) in journals accepting reprint fees only; and 2.5% (3,235) in journals accepting only advertising fees. Journals with commercial relationships were more likely to publish articles with aCOI (9.2% (92/1000) vs. 6.4% (64/1000), p = 0.024). In the multivariate analysis, only a journal’s acceptance of reprint fees served as a significant predictor (OR = 2.81 at 95% CI, 1.5 to 8.6). Shared control estimation was used to evaluate the relationships between commercial publishing practices and aCOI frequency in total and by type. BCa-corrected mean difference effect sizes ranged from -1.0 to 6.1, and confirm findings indicating that accepting reprint fees may constitute the most significant commercial bias. The findings indicate that concerns over the influence of industry advertising in medical journals may be overstated, and that accepting fees for reprints may constitute the largest risk of bias for editorial decision-making.

ES13.03 Foundation for a Smoke Free Future: Funding Opportunities or Smoke Screen for the Tobacco Industry?

The tobacco industry has long sought interactions with the health and medical communities that will enhance its legitimacy and augment profits. In the early 20thcentury, advertising involved the medical community emphasizing doctors who recommended cigarette smoking. From the mid 20thcentury, as scientific evidence developed, the tobacco industry contested restrictions vigorously as tobacco regulation intensified. The advent of ENDS products opened a new phase in marketing which stretched the limits of conventional tobacco control. The PMI Foundation, launched in 2017, targets the health and medical communities, promising research funding, the “Smoke-Free” aim and its interactions with high profile researchers. In the first few decades of the 20thcentury, tobacco companies involved physicians in advertising campaigns to promote health benefits and minimisation strategies for particular brands. Analysis of 1930s and 40s tobacco advertising in medical journals identified a number of strategies employed to involve doctors in promoting cigarettes including flattery, tobacco ‘science’, the advisory role to patients, less “irritating” brands and promotion of specific brands1. Analysis of tobacco advertising from the 1920s to the 1950s identified a focus on throat irritation, strategies to protect from harmful symptoms and portrayal of otorhinolaryngologists as promoters of cigarette-related benefits2. The “More Doctors smoke Camels” campaign3launched in the late 1940s by RJ Reynolds made a number of zealous health benefit claims, although landmark publications linking tobacco cigarettes to lung cancer led to scepticism from the health community and eventual banning of cigarette advertising and promotion in medical journals and at medical conventions3. From the mid-1960s, the paradigm for tobacco regulation shifted as evidence accumulated for the harmful effects. Additional key papers include a 1912 monograph, one of the first publications to link lung cancer with tobacco, early writings on lung cancer surgery and the 1964 US Surgeon General Report on Smoking and Health. Legislative efforts to control tobacco accelerated with, in the United States, the pivotal 1998 Master Settlement Agreement by which tobacco companies were obliged to pay compensation to 46 states to offset costs of smoking-induced illnesses4. In the early 21stcentury the WHO FCTC came in to force in 2005 with the launch of the MPOWER measures in 2008, setting up the tobacco framework that has characterised the last decade and a half and to which 181 countries are signatories. The emergence of e-cigarettes and other ENDS products has shifted tobacco control outside the current purview of the FCTC and opened up new areas of controversy as these products evade conventional regulation. E-cigarettes first appeared in the 20thcentury including designs from the 1960s from BAT and from the 1990s from PMI with the contemporary model attributed to an individual inventor5. The early designs were abandoned at least in part due to concerns about commercial viability6,7and it was not until the last decade or so that e-cigarettes have reached prominence. The emergence of highly appealing and commercially successful ENDS products such as the Juul device has stimulated concern at the level of the FDA and review of e-cigarette regulation. Companies such as Juul Labs (now owned by a tobacco corporation) and PMI advocate harm-minimization through their ENDS products while parent companies continue to sell conventional tobacco cigarettes in less tightly regulated markets. The Phillip Morris Foundation for a Smoke-Free World8was launched in 2017 and immediately prompted controversy. The stated aims of the Foundation include the funding of research, a focus on smoking cessation and harm reduction and the search for solutions to “unique challenges”8. Its launch prompted immediate debate and discussion, including a Lancet Viewpoint by the Foundation’s director, advocating the benefits of reduced-harm products and expressing concern that full implementation of the FCTC would take many years. An editorial in the same Lancet issue raised strong concerns about involving the tobacco industry in tobacco control while acknowledging that (at the time of writing) the Foundation had yet to begin work9. An accompanying commentary piece questions the credibility of the Foundation and points out that the funding of research is used by the tobacco industry as a deliberate strategy that in fact acts as a “public relations” exercise while PMI, in this instance, continues to sell cigarettes as its core product10. More recently, a review of the published tax returns from the Foundation suggest that it is having trouble both raising and spending funds, perhaps indicating some trouble engaging with the research community and multiple publications raise questions about its ethical robustness, the risks of long-term nicotine dependence and its commercial integrity. While the stated aims of the Foundation may appeal, concerns remain about engaging with the tobacco industry, about persistent global cigarette sales, about the use of the Foundation to divert attention from PMI’s efforts to build its market for ENDs products and about the prioritisation of harm-minimisation (with accompanying profits) over genuine efforts to make the world free from tobacco.

Drug advertisements in two dermatology journals: A critical comparison of IJDVL and JAAD

Though drug promotion regulations exist worldwide, low quality of journal drug advertising is a global issue. Medical journals are regarded as a leading source of information for new drugs. They may also modulate prescribing behavior of physicians without their knowledge. A comparative analysis of advertisements from different countries may provide insights regarding strengths and weaknesses of different regulating systems. Prescription drug advertisements from the Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology (IJDVL) and Journal of American Academy of Dermatology (JAAD) were compared to check their compliance with criteria of World Health Organization (WHO) and International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA). All the prescription drug advertisements of at least one page length appearing in all the issues of IJDVL and JAAD from January 2012 till December 2012 were included in this study. The contents of both advertisements were compared for compliance regarding different criteria of ethical codes for drug advertising of WHO and IFPMA. Statistical analysis was done using Fisher's exact test. Compared to IJDVL, more advertisements in JAAD complied with WHO and IFPMA codes. On the whole, advertisements in IJDVL had significantly less information regarding the approved usage, dosage, abbreviated prescribing information (API), summary of scientific information, safety information regarding the drug, and references to the scientific literature to support various claims. However, JAAD had more advertisements with multiple claims than IJDVL, and many advertisements interspersed between scientific articles while IJDVL had none. The complex issue of ethical drug advertising in dermatology journals requires constant review and discussion. Dermatologists should be cautious in assessing any advertisement or claim even if it seems evidence-based. The results from our study highlight the need for a global, proactive and effective regulatory system to ensure ethical medicinal drug advertising in medical journals.

Influencia de las medidas reguladoras en la publicidad de la terapia hormonal sustitutiva

ObjectiveTo determine the influence of regulatory measures on safety in the advertising of medicines for hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and the quality of the information contained in these advertisements. MethodsAdvertisements for HRT were identified in three journals and their characteristics, information, advertising messages and the advertising pressure index (API) were analyzed. ResultsA total of 174 advertisements were identified. The API was low: 5.65, 4.96, 3.03 and 0.58 for 2002 to 2005, showing a drastic reduction in advertising due to the regulatory measures of the Spanish Agency for Medications and Healthcare Products. Forty-one alterations in information content were detected. Only 10% of messages were supported by published studies. Conclusionsa) Drug safety information can have a decisive influence on drug advertising in medical journals; b) the quality of the information contained in drugs advertising is very low and is frequently misleading.

Analyzing the Effectiveness of Pharmaceutical Marketing Using Business Intelligence Methods

Pharmaceutical companies have traditionally marketed their products through a combination of several channels: sales details to physicians, direct-to-consumer advertising, professional medical journal advertising, sponsorship of meetings and events and e-promotion. With an impending patent cliff and subsequent loss in revenue, the industry must depend on, among many factors, recently launched products to offset the revenue loss. Coupled with increased generic competition, companies must evaluate the return on investment of their marketing dollars. This paper analyzes the effectiveness of traditional marketing methods, both industry-wide and for recently launched products, using the latest Business Intelligent methods. The dataset used in this paper is a sample of prescription, promotional, competitive, and product data from SDI Health. The analysis in this paper reveals that traditional marketing methods have a decreasing level of impact with the number of prescriptions dispensed, and describes new potential channels for marketing, as well as collecting and analyzing data to aid the industry improve its resource utilization.

Quality of pharmaceutical advertising and gender bias in medical journals (1998-2008): a review of the scientific literature

ObjectiveTo review the scientific literature on pharmaceutical advertising aimed at health professionals in order to determine whether gender bias has decreased and the quality of information in pharmaceutical advertising has improved over time. MethodsWe performed a content analysis of original articles dealing with medical drug promotion (1998-2008), according to quality criteria such as (a) the number, validity and accessibility of bibliographic references provided in pharmaceutical advertising and (b) the extent to which gender representations were consistent with the prevalence of the diseases. Databases: PUBMED, Medline, Scopus, Sociological Abstract, Eric and LILACS. ResultsWe reviewed 31 articles that analyzed advertising in medical journals from 1975-2005 and were published between 1998 and 2008. We found that the number of references used to support pharmaceutical advertising claims increased from 1975 but that 50% of these references were not valid. There was a tendency to depict men in paid productive roles, while women appeared inside the home or in non-occupational social contexts. Advertisements for psychotropic and cardiovascular drugs overrepresented women and men respectively. ConclusionsThe use of bibliographic references increased between 1998 and 2008. However, representation of traditional male-female roles was similar in 1975 and 2005. Pharmaceutical advertisements may contribute to reinforcing the perception that certain diseases are associated with the most frequently portrayed sex.

Advertising in medical journals: are we missing the point?

"Advertising in medical journals: are we missing the point?." South African Family Practice, 53(4), p. 350

Quality of claims, references and the presentation of risk results in medical journal advertising: a comparative study in Australia, Malaysia and the United States

BackgroundJournal advertising is used by pharmaceutical companies to disseminate medicine information to doctors. The quality of claims, references and the presentation of risk results in Australia and the US has been questioned in several studies. No recent evidence is available on the quality of claims, references and the presentation of risk results in journal advertising in Australia and the US and no Malaysian data have been published. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of claims, references and the presentation of risk results in journal advertising in these three countries.MethodsA consecutive sample of 85 unique advertisements from each country was selected from journal advertising published between January 2004 to December 2006. Claims, references and the presentation of risk results in medical journal advertising were compared between the three countries.ResultsLess than one-third of the claims were unambiguous claims (Australia, 30%, Malaysia 17%, US, 23%). In Malaysia significantly less unambiguous claims were provided than in Australia and the US (P < 0.001). However, the unambiguous claims were supported by more references than other claims (80%). Most evidence was obtained from at least one randomized controlled trial, a systematic review or meta-analysis (Australia, 84%, Malaysia, 81%, US, 76%) with journal articles being the most commonly cited references in all countries. Data on file were significantly more likely to be cited in the US (17%) than in Australia (2%) and Malaysia (4%) (P < 0.001). Advertisements that provided quantitative information reported risk results exclusively as a relative risk reductionConclusionsThe majority of claims were vague suggesting poor quality of claims in journal advertising in these three countries. Evidence from a randomized controlled trial, systematic review or meta- analysis was commonly cited to support claims. However, the more frequent use of data that have not been published and independently reviewed in the US compared to Australia and Malaysia raises questions on the quality of references in the US. The use of relative rather than absolute benefits may overemphasize the benefit of medicines which may leave doctors susceptible to misinterpreting information.

Quality of Pharmaceutical Advertisements in Medical Journals: A Systematic Review

BackgroundJournal advertising is one of the main sources of medicines information to doctors. Despite the availability of regulations and controls of drug promotion worldwide, information on medicines provided in journal advertising has been criticized in several studies for being of poor quality. However, no attempt has been made to systematically summarise this body of research. We designed this systematic review to assess all studies that have examined the quality of pharmaceutical advertisements for prescription products in medical and pharmacy journals.Methods and FindingsStudies were identified via searching electronic databases, web library, search engine and reviewing citations (1950 – February 2006). Only articles published in English and examined the quality of information included in pharmaceutical advertisements for prescription products in medical or pharmacy journals were included. For each eligible article, a researcher independently extracted the data on the study methodology and outcomes. The data were then reviewed by a second researcher. Any disagreements were resolved by consensus. The data were analysed descriptively. The final analysis included 24 articles. The studies reviewed advertisements from 26 countries. The number of journals surveyed in each study ranged from four to 24 journals. Several outcome measures were examined including references and claims provided in advertisements, availability of product information, adherence to codes or guidelines and presentation of risk results. The majority of studies employed a convenience-sampling method. Brand name, generic name and indications were usually provided. Journal articles were commonly cited to support pharmaceutical claims. Less than 67% of the claims were supported by a systematic review, a meta-analysis or a randomised control trial. Studies that assessed misleading claims had at least one advertisement with a misleading claim. Two studies found that less than 28% of claims were unambiguous clinical claims. Most advertisements with quantitative information provided risk results as relative risk reduction. Studies were conducted in 26 countries only and then the generalizability of the results is limited.ConclusionsEvidence from this review indicates that low quality of journal advertising is a global issue. As information provided in journal advertising has the potential to change doctors' prescribing behaviour, ongoing efforts to increase education about drug promotion are crucial. The results from our review suggest the need for a global pro-active and effective regulatory system to ensure that information provided in medical journal advertising is supporting the quality use of medicines.

Antibiotic drug advertising in medical journals

Advertising is a leading strategy for drug promotion. We analysed 779 advertisements in 24 medical journals, 25% of which featured antibiotics. Antibiotic advertisements showed differences compared to those of other drugs. None addressed the issue of antibiotic resistance. Efforts to prevent antibiotic resistance should take antibiotic advertising into consideration.

Direct to Consumer Advertising and Prescription Choice

This paper examines the effects of direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs on doctor choice of drug brands. Using antihistamines as an example, we show that DTCA has little effect on the choice of brand despite the massive DTCA expenditure incurred in this class. In contrast, directed-to-physician advertising (i.e., detailing and medical journal advertising) has positive, significant, and long-lasting effects on the prescription choice of allergy drugs. These results, together with the market expanding results shown in Iizuka and Jin (forthcoming), suggest that DTCA is effective in increasing the aggregate demand per therapeutic class but does not affect doctor choice of prescription within a class. Therefore, DTCA may be viewed as a public good for all drugs in the same class.

Industry guidelines, laws and regulations ignored: quality of drug advertising in medical journals.

To document the quality of evidence base for marketing claims in prescription drug advertisements, to facilitate identification of potential targets for quality improvement. A sample of 1036 advertisements from four major Finnish medical journals published in 2002. Marketing claims were classified in four groups: unambiguous clinical outcome, vague clinical outcome, emotive or immeasurable outcome and non-clinical outcome. Medline references were traced and classified according to the level of evidence available. The statistical variables used in the advertisements were also documented. The sample included 245 distinct advertisements with 883 marketing claims, 1-10 claims per advertisement. Three hundred thirty seven (38%) of the claims were referenced. Each claim could be supported by one reference or more, so the number of references analysed totalled 381, 1-9 references per advertisement. Nine percent of the claims implied unambiguous clinical outcomes, 68% included vague or emotive statements. Twenty one percent of the references were irrelevant to the claim. There was a fair amount of non-scientific and scientific support for the 73 unambiguous claims, but not a single claim was supported by strong scientific evidence. Vague, emotive and non-clinical claims were significantly more often supported by non-Medline or irrelevant references than unambiguous claims. Statistical parameters were stated only 34 times. Referenced marketing claims may appear more scientific, but the use of references does not guarantee the quality of the claims. For the benefit of all stakeholders, both the regulatory control and industry's self-control of drug marketing should adopt more active monitoring roles, and apply sanctions when appropriate. Concerted efforts by several stakeholders might be more effective.

Psychiatrists Debate Ethics Of Drug Marketing

Psychiatrists Debate Ethics Of Drug Marketing

The smoke nuisance.

AS VIVIDLY ILLUSTRATED IN this 1886 wood engraving, the American campaign against cigarettes long antedated the rigorous mid-20th-century epidemiological demonstration of the association between smoking and specific pathological conditions, such as lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. This image, which suggests the mix of medical, sanitary, social, moral, and aesthetic objections to smoking current in this earlier period, appeared in Good Health,1 the health reform journal edited by John Harvey Kellogg from 1874 to 1943. Kellogg was just one of a small army of zealous reformers in the late 19th and early 20th century who combined moral and medical concerns in a campaign that marched from temperance to prohibition and equated the hygienic and social evils of “tobaccoism” with those of alcoholism. Their hope that cigarette prohibition would soon follow alcohol prohibition rose and crested in the 1920s, when women were first recruited to cigarette smoking in large numbers.2 Although physicians participated in the Progressive-era campaigns against smoking, by the 1920s most scientifically minded doctors had distanced themselves from what they were coming to regard as the annoying and embarrassing legacies of Victorian prudery and puritanism.3 Modern scientists and physicians insisted on firm evidence of smoking's harmful effects, and, perhaps lulled by the tobacco companies' heavy advertising in medical journals, they adopted the habit themselves in large numbers. In 1928, one writer complained that cigar and cigarette smoke was so thick at medical meetings that it was difficult to see the lantern slides.4 Some physicians even argued for the cigarette's pathophysiological innocence and psychological benefit. In October of the same year, an advertisement for Lucky Strike cigarettes in Collier's magazine claimed the cigarettes had the endorsement of “20,697 doctors.” Only the definitive epidemiological studies of Richard Doll, A. Bradford Hill, and others in the late 1940s and early 1950s would begin to turn the tide of medical and popular opinion. The Web site also provides information on ordering reproductions of images. If you have a print, photograph, or other visual item that might be appropriate for this collection, please contact the History of Medicine Division.

Targeted Advertising in Medical Journals

Targeted Advertising in Medical Journals

The Pap smear, automated rescreening, and negligent nondisclosure.

A new element in the Papanicolaou smear liability crisis is the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of 2 automated rescreening devices. Their manufacturers have undertaken aggressive advertising in medical journals and in women's magazines, generating controversy about whether this positions such devices as the new standard of care and whether failure to offer such rescreening might lead to liability alleging to tort of negligent nondisclosure, with contributing opinions from pathologists' and manufacturers' counsels. Cases are cited in prenatal diagnostics and blood banking that established liability for failing to disclose diagnostic modalities used by at most only a minority of practitioners and, therefore, have not yet achieved standard-of-care status. It is concluded that informed consent for cervicovaginal smears should include disclosure of the availability of automated rescreening to reduce negligence liability.

Commentary: health-industry advertising in medical journals: conflict of interest or much ado about nothing?

Commentary: health-industry advertising in medical journals: conflict of interest or much ado about nothing?

Commentary: Advertising adversities

Misleading drug advertising in medical journals has been a thorny issue for over 100 years1 in many countries.2 3 4 In India, dealing with the pharmaceutical industry and its promotional...

Effects of promotion on pharmaceutical demand

The research question addressed in this study was, “Do changes in promotional expenditure cause changes in the size of the market (primary demand) or market share (selective demand)?” Two types of promotion were evaluated; sales calls to physicians and medical journal advertising. The sales elasticities of each of these promotional techniques were estimated through the use of ARIMA modeling. The market expansive effects and the market share effects were measured for each of 7 drugs in two therapeutic categories, the benzodiazepines and diuretics. The results of the analysis showed that there was no correlation between changes in detailing or journal advertising expenditures and primary or selective demand. Thus, it was assumed that the primary and selective demand elasticities for pharmaceutical advertising may be equal to zero. Drug manufacturers should evaluate the effects of reductions in their promotional expenditures, changes in promotional content, as well as seek alternative methods of advertising which may have a higher sales elasticity and effectiveness.

Drug promotion and the doctor.

British Journal of Clinical PharmacologyVolume 14, Issue 5 p. 661-664 Free Access Drug promotion and the doctor. K. O'Malley, K. O'MalleySearch for more papers by this authorM. O'Hanrahan, M. O'HanrahanSearch for more papers by this author K. O'Malley, K. O'MalleySearch for more papers by this authorM. O'Hanrahan, M. O'HanrahanSearch for more papers by this author First published: November 1982 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.1982.tb04952.xCitations: 7AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL References ASSOCIATION OF THE BRITISH PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY (1978). Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry, fifth edition. London. BINNS, T.B. & SMITH, A. (1979). Medical Representatives. Br. med. J., 1, 1134– 1135. BRECKON, W. (1972). Advertising and promotion. In. The drug makers. London: Eyre Methuen. BURLEY, D.M. (1979). Identifying the medical consultants of pharmaceutical companies. Lancet, ii, 354. DUKES, M.N.G. (1979). Identifying the medical consultants of pharmaceutical companies. Lancet, ii, 696. FASSOLD, R.W. & GOWDEY, C.W. (1968). A survey of physicians' reactions to drug promotion. Can. med. Ass. J., 98, 701– 705. FRISOF, K.B. & PARNICKY, K. (1979). The burden of junk mail. New Engl. J. Med., 300, 865– 866. HEMMINKI, E. (1973). The quality of drug advertisements in two Finnish medical journals. A comparison between psychotropic and other drug advertisements. Soc. Sci. Med., 7, 51– 59. HEMMINKI, E. (1975). Review of literature on the factors affecting drug prescribing. Soc. Sci. Med., 9, 111– 115. HEMMINKI, E. (1977). Content analysis of drug-detailing by pharmaceutical representatives. Med. Educ., 11, 210– 215. HEMMINKI, E. & PESONEN, T. (1977a). The function of drug company representatives. Scand. J. Soc. Med., 5, 105– 114. HEMMINKI, E. & PESONEN, T. (1977b). An inquiry into associations between leading physicians and the drug industry in Finland. Soc. Sci. Med., 11, 501– 506. HOLLAND, A.E. (1977). Representatives and advertisements as sources of information. Postgrad. med. J., 53, 559– 561. LANCET (1976). Promotional costs and the Pharmaceutical Industry. Lancet, i, 817– 818. LINN, L.S. & DAVIES, M.S. (1972). Physicians' orientation toward the legitimacy of drug use and their preferred source of new drug information. Soc. Sci. Med., 6, 199– 203. LUNDE, P.K.M. & HERXHEIMER, A. (1979). Identifying the medical consultants of pharmaceutical companies. Lancet, ii, 197. PERETZ, S.M. (1978). Medical journal advertising as currently viewed by the pharmaceutical industry. J. Roy. Soc. Med., 71, 282– 284. PETSONK, E.L. (1979). Conflicts of interest in drug research. New Engl. J. Med., 301, 335. PRESCOTT, L.F. (1977). Drug promotion. Br. med. J., 1, 574– 575. RELMAN, A.S. (1979). Who reviews the ads? New Engl. J. Med, 301, 999. SAINSBURY, J. (1967). Report of the committee of enquiry into the relationship of the pharmaceutical industry with the National Health Service 1965–1967. London: HMSO. SILVERMAN, M. & LEE, P. (1974). Pills, profits and politics. Los Angeles, California: University of California Press. SMITH, M.C. (1977). Drug product advertising and prescribing: a review of the evidence. Am. J. hosp. Pharm., 34, 1208– 1224. STIMSON, G.V. (1977). Do drug advertisements provide therapeutic information? J. med. Ethics, 3, 7– 13. TANNOCK, I.F. (1979). Responsibility in advertising: an oncologists view. New Engl. J. Med., 301, 1004. THOMPSON, E.L. (1979). Sexual bias in drug advertisements. Soc. Sci. Med., 13, 187– 191. WILLIAMS, J.D. & GEDDES, A.M. (1973). Advertising of antibiotics. Br. med. J., ii, 116. WORTHEN, D.B. (1973). Prescribing influences, an overview. Br. J. med. Educ., 7, 109– 117. Citing Literature Volume14, Issue5November 1982Pages 661-664 ReferencesRelatedInformation