Editor—Mansfield et al discussed direct to consumer advertising of drugs.1 Consumer advertising on television is different from drug advertisements in newspapers and magazines.
Television advertisements mention risks very quickly, whereas the required “brief summary” in print advertisements includes more detailed information. Unfortunately, such summaries are usually illegible (because of tiny type sizes), unreadable (because of long and complicated sentences), and incomprehensible (because they require consumers to understand specialised research and pharmacological and statistical concepts).2
My readability analysis of six brief summaries found them to be written at a graduate school reading level; four “patient summaries” were written at grade 11-12 (for students aged 17-18), which was better, but still too difficult for many consumers.3
Cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitors were widely promoted through consumer advertisements. But how could patients understand their risks if they couldn't understand the brief summary that described those risks? At some point, do patients (and their doctors?) choose what ultimately become unsafe drugs because they can't understand the risks?
Direct to consumer drug advertisements aren't just about risks and benefits but about how patient safety can be compromised by incomprehensible information.
Competing interests: None declared.
References
- 1.Mansfield PR, Mintzes B, Richards D, Toop L. Direct to consumer advertising. BMJ 2005;330: 5-6. (1 January.) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Hochhauser M. Consumer-friendly patient information should replace DTC brief summaries. Product Manage Today 2004;15: 26-8. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Hochhauser M. Which prescription for the illegible and unreadable DTC brief summary—major surgery or euthanasia? Managed Care Q 2002;10: 6-10. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]