Prescription Drug Ads Research Articles

Patient influencers’ promotion of prescription drugs on Instagram: Effects of illness disclosure on persuasion knowledge through narrative transportation

Via two experiments, the present study examined how patient influencers’ illness disclosure in their sponsored posts of prescription drug ads predicts individuals’ persuasion knowledge and behavioral intentions. Study 1 (N = 206) revealed that influencers’ illness disclosure predicted attitudinal persuasion knowledge through transportation and parasocial interaction, further suggesting that illness disclosure reduces persuasion knowledge, causing people to perceive prescription drug ads on Instagram as less promotional. Study 2 (N = 181) replicated the mediating roles of transportation and parasocial interaction, demonstrating that first-person voice (vs. third-person) illness narrative in a patient influencer’s medical device promotion on Instagram significantly predicted transportation, which then enhanced parasocial interaction with the influencer to influence eWOM intention as well as help-seeking intention. The two experiments demonstrate how influencers’ illness disclosure narratives affect persuasion knowledge and online behavioral intention as well as real-life behavioral intention. Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2022.2054614 .

Do dissonant ad visuals cause consumers to discount prescription drug side effects?

In most video-based advertising, visuals reinforce the ads’ verbal messages. This use of redundant images, however, is often not the case in television commercials for prescription drugs. These ads frequently employ dissonant visuals, or pleasant images, during the narration of the drugs’ negative side effects. This visual-verbal inconsistency could adversely impact consumers’ interpretation and decision-making about the drugs. Through an empirical investigation, this study found that consumers attribute significantly more positive affect and lower risk to prescription drug ads that employ dissonant visuals versus redundant ones. Such findings challenge the ethicality of these pervasive and influential health messages.

Lifestyles are risky, too: the social construction of risk and empowerment in prescription drug direct-to-consumer advertisements

In this article, we examine the portrayal of non-drug related health risks and patient empowerment messages in prescription drug advertising. Little is known about the social construction of non-drug related risks in direct-to-consumer advertisements. In addition, research has failed to investigate to what extent, and how, prescription drug ads use risk messages to construct understandings of empowered medicated patients. To fill these gaps in research, we conducted a content analysis of 136 US prescription drug advertisements that aired on television from 2014–2015. Drawing on the reflexive modernisation framework, we find that ads go beyond disclosing the risks associated with taking the promoted drug by emphasising the risks associated with not taking the prescribed drug. Ads empower patients in two distinct ways, through ‘health empowerment’ and ‘lifestyle empowerment’. These forms of empowerment are portrayed as natural responses to health and lifestyle risks. We also describe two types of ads: medical need and lifestyle ads. The former emphasises health empowerment, and the latter exhibits strong themes of lifestyle empowerment. We extend the findings of previous research by pinpointing how drug companies use risk messages as a strategy to motivate, rather than deter, audiences to learn more about a promoted treatment and by identifying the different marketing strategies used in prescription drug ads based on the lifestyle status of a drug. Our research provides a clearer understanding of the relationship between the presentation of health risks and reflexive modernisation, patient empowerment, and health lifestyles in the risk society.

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

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

Consumer Reactions to Price Comparison and Disclosure Information in Prescription Drug Print Advertising

Advertisers sometimes include price‐comparison information in direct‐to‐consumer (DTC) prescription drug ads because consumers may value such savings when considering drug options. It is not known whether a context statement—a disclosure noting that compared products may or may not be equally effective or safe or costly—could improve consumer understanding of risk, efficacy, and price. Using a between‐subjects experiment, we tested effects of price claim type (price comparison versus general cost savings) and presence of a disclosure statement in a fictitious but professionally developed DTC prescription drug print ad. Results indicated that when people remembered seeing the disclosure, they demonstrated uncertainty regarding risks, efficacy, and savings; however, most did not notice the disclosure, despite its prominent placement in the ad.

Serious and actionable risks, plus disclosure: Investigating an alternative approach for presenting risk information in prescription drug television advertisements.

Broadcast direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug ads that present product claims are required to also present the product's major risks. Debate exists regarding how much information should be included in these major risk statements. Some argue that such statements expose people to unnecessary amounts of information, while others argue that they leave out important information. Examine the impact of type of risk statement (unedited versus serious and actionable risks only) and a disclosure indicating that not all risks are presented on consumers' ability to remember the important risks and benefits of a drug following exposure to a DTC television advertisement (ad). Risk and benefit perceptions, ad-prompted actions, recognition of the disclosure statement, and evaluations of both the disclosure and risk statement were also examined. A web-based experiment was conducted in which US adults who self-reported as having depression (N=500), insomnia (N=500), or high cholesterol (N=500) were randomly assigned to view one of four versions of the television ad, and then complete a questionnaire. The type of risk statement had a significant effect on risk recall and recognition, benefit recognition, perceived risk severity (depression condition only), and perceived benefit magnitude (high cholesterol condition only). Disclosure recognition (using bias-corrected scores) ranged from 63% to 70% across the three illness samples. The revised risk statement improved overall processing of the television ad, as evidenced by improved risk recall and recognition and improved benefit recognition. Further, the presence of the disclosure did not adversely affect consumers' processing of drug risk and benefit information. Therefore, limiting the risks presented in DTC television ads and including a disclosure alerting consumers that not all risks are presented may be an effective strategy for communicating product risks.

As Spending Skyrockets for Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Ads, So Does Pushback.

Arguments center on harm vs. benefit to patients and providers.

Consumer perceptions of prescription and over-the-counter drug advertisements with promotional offers

ABSTRACTInformation on the effects of promotional offers in direct-to-consumer prescription drug ads is limited. In two studies, we examined the effect of promotional offers (e.g., money-back guarantee) and ad type (creating prescription and over-the-counter drug ads by varying the presence of benefit and risk information). We found little effect of promotional offers. Adding benefit (risk) information to the ad increased consumers’ knowledge of the benefit (risk) information and their efficacy (risk) perceptions. In most cases, adding risk information to an ad with benefit information increased risk knowledge and perceptions without decreasing benefit knowledge or perceptions.

The Effects of Advertising and Other Marketing Communications on Health-Related Consumer Behaviors

Advertisements and other marketing communications extensively discuss food and nutrition, tobacco, alcohol, and prescription drugs. In addition to mass media advertising and public service announcements (PSAs), messages are placed on product labels and in television shows and social media. Research indicates that these health-related communications can have significant and measurable effects on consumer cognitions, emotions, and behaviors. Some messages enhance health by discouraging unhealthy or risky consumption; others do the opposite. While many messages have their intended effects, other messages are discounted or even counterproductive. The specific effects often depend on message content and/or execution in combination with consumer characteristics. Therefore, it is important to tailor the communications to the target consumers, and to test for intended and unintended effects. Highlights • Product claims, labels and package icons can reduce unhealthy food consumption. • Antismoking and anti-drinking fear appeals can help reduce product use. • Direct-to-consumer prescription drug ads can increase drug requests and sales.

Fair Balance and Adequate Provision in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Online Banner Advertisements: A Content Analysis.

BackgroundThe current direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) guidelines were developed with print, television, and radio media in mind, and there are no specific guidelines for online banner advertisements.ObjectiveThis study evaluates how well Internet banner ads comply with existing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines for DTCA in other media.MethodsA content analysis was performed of 68 banner advertisements. A coding sheet was developed based on (1) FDA guidance documents for consumer-directed prescription drug advertisements and (2) previous DTCA content analyses. Specifically, the presence of a brief summary detailing the drug’s risks and side effects or of a “major statement” identifying the drug’s major risks, and the number and type of provisions made available to consumers for comprehensive information about the drug were coded. In addition, the criterion of “fair balance,” the FDA’s requirement that prescription drug ads balance information relating to the drug’s risks with information relating to its benefits, was measured by numbering the benefit and risk facts identified in the ads and by examining the presentation of risk and benefit information.ResultsEvery ad in the sample included a brief summary of risk information and at least one form of adequate provision as required by the FDA for broadcast ads that do not give audiences a brief summary of a drug’s risks. No ads included a major statement. There were approximately 7.18 risk facts for every benefit fact. Most of the risks (98.85%, 1292/1307) were presented in the scroll portion of the ad, whereas most of the benefits (66.5%, 121/182) were presented in the main part of the ad. Out of 1307 risk facts, 1292 were qualitative and 15 were quantitative. Out of 182 benefit facts, 181 were qualitative and 1 was quantitative. The majority of ads showed neutral images during the disclosure of benefit and risk facts. Only 9% (6/68) of the ads displayed positive images and none displayed negative images when presenting risks facts. When benefit facts were being presented, 7% (5/68) showed only positive images. No ads showed negative images when the benefit facts were being presented.ConclusionsIn the face of ambiguous regulatory guidelines for online banner promotion, drug companies appear to make an attempt to adapt to regulatory guidelines designed for traditional media. However, banner ads use various techniques of presentation to present the advertised drug in the best possible light. The FDA should formalize requirements that drug companies provide a brief summary and include multiple forms of adequate provision in banner ads.

Pushback on drug ads

Like most physicians in the United States, Dr. Ryan Gray has seen his share of prescription drug ads on television. Many are cringe-worthy, he says, citing as an example the one he saw recently for a drug to treat opioid-induced constipation. “This is an example of a drug company creating a

Disease Information in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Print Ads

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertisements sometimes include information about the disease condition in addition to information about the advertised product. Although the intent of such information is to educate about the disease condition, in some cases consumers may mistakenly assume that the drug will address all of the potential consequences of the condition mentioned in the ad. We investigated the effects of adding disease information to DTC prescription drug print ads on consumer product perceptions and understanding. Participants (4,064 adults) viewed 1 of 15 DTC print ads for fictitious prescription drugs indicated to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, anemia, or lymphoma that varied in disease information presence, type, and format. Participants answered questions that assessed risk and benefit memory, perception, and behavioral intention. Results indicate that exposure to disease information as part of DTC prescription drug ads can promote the impression that the drug addresses consequences of the condition that are not part of the drug's indication.

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.

Correction of Overstatement and Omission in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising

Little experimental evidence exists regarding corrective television advertising as a remedy for misleading direct-to-consumer prescription drug ads. We examined how exposure to an ad for a fictitious prescription drug that appeared to offer benefits and risks superior to normative standards for asthma medication (i.e., a simulated violative ad) and a corresponding corrective ad shaped viewer perceptions, understanding, and intended behavior. Through an experiment with 1,057 participants, we found that a corrective ad counteracted viewer belief of an overstatement of efficacy claim, but was less successful in counteracting omission of risk. Corrective ad exposure also affected general viewer perceptions of, and intended behaviors toward, the drug.

Causes and consequences of trust in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising

Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising (DTCA) is believed to empower consumers, but national surveys indicate declining trust in DTCA. Given the unique characteristics of this category, it is unclear what the likely consequences are of reduced trust in these ads. Furthermore, previous research is inadequate to discern the basis of trust in DTCA. To address this issue, a model of the antecedent and consequent factors connected to trust in DTCA was developed based on prior empirical findings and relevant theory. This paper presents survey findings testing the model. Results show trust is predicted by perceptions of mediated health information sources, advertising in general, pharmaceutical companies, and the perceived value and informativeness of prescription drug ads. Regarding outcomes, results were mixed for the relationship of trust with attention, attitudes, and behavioural intent. Overall, findings suggest trust plays a complex role in shaping consumer reactions to prescription drug ads.

Important Safety Information or Important Risk Information? A Question of Framing in Prescription Drug Advertisements.

The summary of risks in a prescription drug print advertisement is typically headlined either "Important Safety Information" or "Important Risk Information." Research has shown that words used to frame information can influence interpretation of the information. We examined the impact of headline framing on risk perception among consumers viewing prescription drug ads. Participants (N = 2000) were randomly assigned to see the title "Important Safety Information" or "Important Risk Information" before reading a description of risks for a fictitious drug. Participants then answered questions about the perceived risk of the drug, attempted to recall the section heading, and reported demographic characteristics. Results revealed no differences between participants in the 2 conditions, suggesting that framing drug risk information in terms of its safety or risk does not differentially affect consumer risk perception.

How to Put Prescription Drug Ads on Your Syllabus

How to Put Prescription Drug Ads on Your Syllabus

Content Analysis of False and Misleading Claims in Television Advertising for Prescription and Nonprescription Drugs

False and misleading advertising for drugs can harm consumers and the healthcare system, and previous research has demonstrated that physician-targeted drug advertisements may be misleading. However, there is a dearth of research comparing consumer-targeted drug advertising to evidence to evaluate whether misleading or false information is being presented in these ads. To compare claims in consumer-targeted television drug advertising to evidence, in order to evaluate the frequency of false or misleading television drug advertising targeted to consumers. A content analysis of a cross-section of television advertisements for prescription and nonprescription drugs aired from 2008 through 2010. We analyzed commercial segments containing prescription and nonprescription drug advertisements randomly selected from the Vanderbilt Television News Archive, a census of national news broadcasts. For each advertisement, the most-emphasized claim in each ad was identified based on claim iteration, mode of communication, duration and placement. This claim was then compared to evidence by trained coders, and categorized as being objectively true, potentially misleading, or false. Potentially misleading claims omitted important information, exaggerated information, made lifestyle associations, or expressed opinions. False claims were factually false or unsubstantiated. Of the most emphasized claims in prescription (n = 84) and nonprescription (n = 84) drug advertisements, 33% were objectively true, 57% were potentially misleading and 10% were false. In prescription drug ads, there were more objectively true claims (43%) and fewer false claims (2%) than in nonprescription drug ads (23% objectively true, 7% false). There were similar numbers of potentially misleading claims in prescription (55%) and nonprescription (61%) drug ads. Potentially misleading claims are prevalent throughout consumer-targeted prescription and nonprescription drug advertising on television. These results are in conflict with proponents who argue the social value of drug advertising is found in informing consumers about drugs.

Direct-to-Consumer Drug Advertising and “Health Media Filters”: A Qualitative Study of Older Adult Women's Responses to DTC Ads

Print and broadcast direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug ads are permitted in the United States and New Zealand but banned elsewhere. Since restrictions on DTC ads were eased in the U.S. in 1997, these ads have appeared in exponentially rising numbers and use increasingly sophisticated marketing tactics. This qualitative study of DTC ad response and older women is based on in-depth interviews with 25 older women (ages 65–90) in suburban Pennsylvania and Delaware. Women were selected for this study for their tendency to act as health information seekers for themselves and their families. This study used symbolic interactionism and grounded theory as theoretical frameworks to explore how the women responded to a selection of 12 DTC ads found in magazines targeted to older consumers. Qualitative interviews were coded and analyzed. The final analysis indicated four “health media filters” that participants used to understand symbolic texts and pictures in the ads. These findings suggest that further study may be useful to understand more about how media literacy contributes to health literacy, and exposure to health-related media affects communication between patients and healthcare providers.

An examination of humor and endorser effects on consumers' responses to direct‐to‐consumer advertising

PurposeThis study aims to examine how product involvement moderates the effects of emotional appeals namely humor and endorsers on consumers' responses to direct‐to‐consumer advertising (DTCA).Design/methodology/approachThis study employed a 2 (Humor: humor vs. non‐humor)×2 (Endorser: celebrity vs expert)×2 (Involvement: high vs low) factorial experimental design. Subjects were 420 allergy/asthma sufferers or non‐sufferers attending a large Southwestern US university as undergraduate and graduate students.FindingsResults confirm that low involvement consumers demonstrate more positive responses than high involvement consumers toward prescription drug ads with emotional appeals. Humor or a celebrity endorser enhances ad and brand attitudes, brand recall, and copy point recall of consumers without medical conditions. However, an expert endorser is found to be more effective in improving ad credibility. A three‐way interaction between humor, endorser, and involvement was evident indicating that the celebrity endorser and humor jointly generated more positive responses than other combinations of treatment group when product involvement was low. These findings clearly suggest that use of emotional appeals in DTCA does not influence attitudes and memory of target audience who are suffering from a condition.Originality/valueThis is the first empirical study that examines the effects of emotional appeals namely humor and endorsers on consumers' responses to DTCA.