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

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 4088

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

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Peay MY, Peay ER.
Patterns of preference for information sources in the adoption of new drugs by specialists.
Soc Sci Med 1990; 31:(4):467-76


Abstract:

The present study investigated the adoption of new prescription drugs by specialists who treat serious disorders using relatively high risk drugs with potentially serious side effects. One-hundred and fifty-six specialists, primarily practicing in medical specialties, evaluated a number of drug information sources and reported their use of these sources both in their general drug adoption procedures and in the adoption of one of a number of target drugs. As predicted, the pattern of drug adoption among specialists is substantially different from that generally reported in earlier studies, which are usually based on samples of general practitioners or of general practitioners and specialists combined. Professional sources of information predominate throughout the process, both in adoption procedures generally used and in the adoption of target drugs. The majority of specialists reported contact with commercial sources at some stage in the adoption process for the target drugs, but these sources were not, as is often reported in the literature, the main sources of first news of a new drug, nor did they exert much influence at the prescribing stage. It is clear from these results that in future research on drug innovation, different classes of medical practitioners, such as specialists vs general practitioners, will need to be distinguished.

Keywords:
*analytic survey/Australia/source of information/new drugs/specialists/INFLUENCE OF PROMOTION: PRESCRIBING, DRUG USE/PROMOTION AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION: DOCTORS Attitude of Health Personnel Australia Diffusion of Innovation Drug Information Services/utilization* Drug Utilization Female Humans Male Middle Aged Prescriptions, Drug Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Specialties, Medical/statistics & numerical data*

 

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

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

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

Forgot your username or password?

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

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


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

Email a Friend








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

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