Table 2.
Papers reviewed categorized as being based on a perception of the uninformed patient and certainty of professional’s knowledge
| Country (reference) | Method | Hypothetical* |
|---|---|---|
| UK (57) | Survey questionnaire (11 questions, only first 7 reported on in this paper) about a leaflet on antibiotics, completed by 289 patients | No |
| Netherlands (30) | Observation in pharmacy of 80 patients buying OTC medicines followed by structured home interview | No |
| UK (34) | Questionnaire completed in face‐to‐face interview with 80 members of general public in a shopping centre, self completed by 48 pharmacists and 66 GPs. Different questions asked of the three groups. Patients shown a PIL for an unspecified medicine | Yes |
| USA (32) | Telephone interview by pharmacist of 85 older patients to evaluate a chemotherapy leaflet. (Cancer patients involved in development of leaflet) | No |
| Australia (46) | Content analysis of written drug information (more than 91 items) for patients given out by rheumatologists | No |
| Australia (43) | Structured home interview (and medication assessment) with 204 older people to explore medicine information needs. Older people shown an example of a leaflet for a medicine they were not necessarily taking | Yes |
| UK (22) | Ten qualitative interviews with patients, and 4 focus groups with 22 parents of children attending 2 schools, about OTC medicines | Mixed |
| USA (42) | Mixed method. Focus groups and interviews with patients to develop written information on contraceptive pill. Questionnaire to staff to get views on the leaflet developed | No |
*‘Hypothetical’ studies recruited participants who were not actually taking or had recently taken medicines relating to the written medicines information that was being studied.