↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Quality of Pharmaceutical Advertisements in Medical Journals: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Quality of Pharmaceutical Advertisements in Medical Journals: A Systematic Review
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0006350
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noordin Othman, Agnes Vitry, Elizabeth E. Roughead

Abstract

Journal 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Unknown 103 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 19%
Student > Master 20 19%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 20 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 41%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 24 22%