↓ Skip to main content

Ethical and epistemic issues in direct-to-consumer drug advertising: where is patient agency?

Overview of attention for article published in Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Ethical and epistemic issues in direct-to-consumer drug advertising: where is patient agency?
Published in
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, March 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11019-012-9386-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine A. Womack

Abstract

Arguments for and against direct-to-consumer drug advertising (DTCA) center on two issues: (1) the epistemic effects on patients through access to information provided by the ads; and (2) the effects of such information on patients' abilities to make good choices in the healthcare marketplace. Advocates argue that DTCA provides useful information for patients as consumers, including information connecting symptoms to particular medical conditions, information about new drug therapies for those conditions. Opponents of DTCA point out substantial omissions in information provided by the ads and argue that the framing of the ads may mislead patients about the indications, uses, and effectiveness of the drugs advertised. They also suggest that DTCA has a number of potentially negative effects on the doctor-patient relationship. The standard arguments appear to assume a simplistic correlation-more information means more agency for patients. However, empirical studies on medical decision making suggest that this relationship is much more complex and nuanced. I examine recent research on ways in which patients are vulnerable with respect to DTCA. In order to address the complex issues of information acquisition and consumer decision-making in the health care marketplace, the focus should not be simply on what information patients need in order to make medical decisions, but also on the conditions under which patients actually are able to make medical decisions requiring complex medication information. This requires examining both the cognitive limitations of patients with respect to drug information and investigating patients' preferences and needs in a variety of medical contexts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 5%
Ireland 1 5%
Unknown 18 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 30%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 20%
Social Sciences 4 20%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 10%
Psychology 2 10%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 4 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 October 2020.
All research outputs
#13,148,117
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#289
of 590 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,594
of 197,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 590 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 197,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.