Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Ther Innov Regul Sci ; 57(4): 712-716, 2023 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37061633

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Healthcare providers (HCPs) often encounter clinical trial results in the form of data displays in prescription drug promotions. Information conveyed in data displays vary in their presentation and complexity. This study describes characteristics of data displays in prescription drug advertising targeted to HCPs. METHODS: This study characterized the content of 140 data displays in 98 unique print advertisements from 2009 to present and identified in AdPharm, an online database of pharmaceutical advertisements. Two reviewers independently coded the advertisements for characteristics (κ = 0.85) including complexity, format, and quality. RESULTS: About one-third (32%) of the advertisements contained multiple data displays (range 2 to 6) and 44% showed clinical data from oncology trials; other disease domains were mental and behavioral health (14%), rheumatology and autoimmune disorders (8%), endocrinology (7%), cardiology (6%), infectious disease (6%), pulmonology and allergy (4%), and others (< 2% each). About one-half (51%) of displays were classified as "simple" which included "pseudographs" and basic tables or charts. "Complex" displays appeared as survival curves, line graphs, or bar graphs with complex features. Most complex displays included a comparator drug (90%), plain language restatement of the key finding (93%) and disclosure statements (91%) with additional study details, although their placement varied. Complex displays were of high quality, according to our selected indicators; our analysis found no data distortion or errors. CONCLUSION: Data displays in prescription drug advertising are often highly complex. Future research assessing understanding of data displays and the potentially beneficial effect of disclosures and other features is warranted.


Assuntos
Medicamentos sob Prescrição , Humanos , Publicidade , Apresentação de Dados , Indústria Farmacêutica , Pessoal de Saúde
2.
Addict Behav ; 91: 136-140, 2019 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30389200

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The science surrounding e-cigarettes and other electronic vaping products (EVPs) is rapidly evolving, and the health effects of vaping are unclear. Little research has explored how individuals respond to information acknowledging scientific uncertainty. The aim of the present study was to understand the impact of messages about scientific uncertainty regarding the health effects of vaping on risk perceptions and behavioral intentions. METHODS: Adults in an online experiment (n = 2508) were randomly exposed to view either a control message (a short factual statement about EVPs) or an uncertainty message (the control message plus additional information describing why EVP-related research is limited or inconclusive). Participants rated the risks of vaping and their intentions to try or stop vaping. RESULTS: Individuals who viewed the uncertainty message rated vaping as less risky than those who viewed the control message. Message exposure did not impact intentions to try vaping soon or intentions to stop vaping in the next 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Acknowledging scientific uncertainty made EVP use seem less risky. Future research should explore possible drivers of this response, such as deeper message processing or emotional reactions. Researchers and practitioners designing public health campaigns about vaping might consider a cautious approach to presenting information about scientific uncertainty.


Assuntos
Atitude Frente a Saúde , Sistemas Eletrônicos de Liberação de Nicotina , Comunicação em Saúde/métodos , Intenção , Incerteza , Vaping , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Percepção , Distribuição Aleatória , Risco , Adulto Jovem
3.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 5(2): e134, 2016 Jun 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27349898

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Text messaging (short message service, SMS) has been shown to be effective in delivering interventions for various diseases and health conditions, including smoking cessation. While there are many published studies regarding smoking cessation text messaging interventions, most do not provide details about the study's operational methods. As a result, there is a gap in our understanding of how best to design studies of smoking cessation text messaging programs. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to detail the operational methods used to conduct a randomized trial comparing three different versions of the National Cancer Institute's SmokefreeText (SFTXT) program, designed for smokers 18 to 29 years of age. We detail our methods for recruiting participants from the Internet, reducing fraud, conducting online data collection, and retaining panel study participants. METHODS: Participants were recruited through website advertisements and market research online panels. Screening questions established eligibility for the study (eg, 18 to 29 years of age, current smoker). Antifraud measures screened out participants who could not meet the study requirements. After completing a baseline survey, participants were randomized to one of three study arms, which varied by type and timing of text message delivery. The study offered US $20 gift cards as incentives to complete each of four follow-up surveys. Automated email reminders were sent at designated intervals to increase response rates. Researchers also provided telephone reminders to those who had not completed the survey after multiple email reminders. We calculated participation rates across study arms and compared the final sample characteristics to the Current Population Survey to examine generalizability. RESULTS: Recruitment methods drove 153,936 unique visitors to the SFTXT Study landing page and 27,360 began the screener. Based on the screening questions, 15,462 out of 27,360 responders (56.51%) were eligible to participate. Of the 15,462 who were eligible, 9486 passed the antifraud measures that were implemented; however, 3882 failed to verify their email addresses or cell phone numbers, leaving 5604 who were invited to complete the baseline survey. Of the 5604 who were invited, 4432 completed the baseline survey, but only 4027 were retained for analysis because 405 did not receive the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Although antifraud measures helped to catch participants who failed study requirements and could have biased the data collected, it is possible that the email and cell phone verification check excluded some potentially eligible participants from the study. Future research should explore ways to implement verification methods without risking the loss of so many potential participants. CLINICALTRIAL: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01885052; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01885052; (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6iWzcmFdw).

4.
Am J Prev Med ; 45(2): 182-9, 2013 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23867025

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released a draft recommendation advising against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in October 2011, a major shift from previous years of recommending neither for or against PSA testing due to insufficient evidence. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess men's awareness of the new recommendation, and their responses to it. METHODS: This study comprised a web survey of men aged 40-74 years that was conducted through GfK Custom Research, LLC's Knowledge Panel® from November 22 to December 2, 2011. Chi-square tests and logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with disagreement with and intention to follow the recommendation. Data were analyzed in March 2012. RESULTS: The survey sample included 1089 men without a history of prostate cancer. After reviewing the recommendation, 62% agreed with the recommendation. Age and worry about getting prostate cancer were significantly related to disagreement with the recommendation. Only 13% of respondents were intenders (they planned to follow the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation and not get a prostate-specific antigen test in the future); 54% were non-intenders (they planned to not follow the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation and get a prostate-specific antigen test in the future; and 33% were undecided. Black race, higher income, having a PSA test in the past 2 years, and being somewhat/very worried about getting prostate cancer were all positively associated with being a non-intender. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that consumers are favorably disposed to PSA testing, despite new evidence suggesting that the harms outweigh the benefits. The new USPSTF recommendation against PSA testing in all men may be met with resistance.


Assuntos
Comitês Consultivos , Programas de Rastreamento , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde/métodos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Atitude Frente a Saúde , Distribuição de Qui-Quadrado , Inquéritos Epidemiológicos , Humanos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/psicologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Participação do Paciente , Neoplasias da Próstata/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias da Próstata/psicologia , Análise de Regressão , Medição de Risco , Estados Unidos
5.
Am J Prev Med ; 40(5): 497-504, 2011 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21496748

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: On November 16, 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released new breast cancer screening recommendations, resulting in considerable controversy. PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to assess the volume and framing of the public discourse around the mammography recommendations and determine if women were knowledgeable about the new recommendations. METHODS: Two different types of data collection methods were used for this study: (1) a content analysis of news stories and social media posts around the time of the USPSTF announcement and (2) a web-based survey of women aged 40-74 years conducted through Knowledge Networks from December 17, 2009, to January 6, 2010. Data were analyzed in 2010. RESULTS: The survey sample included 1221 women aged 40-74 years who had never had breast cancer. The majority of the articles and posts (51.9%) did not support the screening recommendations, and 17.6% were supportive. Less than one quarter of the sample could identify the new recommendations for women aged 40-49 years and 50-74 years. Results from logistic regression analyses identified characteristics associated with correct knowledge of the recommendations for each age group. Level of attention paid to the recommendations was significantly associated with accurate knowledge of the recommendations for each age group. Having a mammogram within the past 2 years, "other" race (i.e., not black or white), and having higher levels of education, confidence that recommendations were based on the latest research, and attention paid to the new guidelines were all significantly and positively associated with correct knowledge of the new recommendation for women aged 40-49 years. CONCLUSIONS: The new recommendations confused women (30.0%) more than they helped them understand when to get a mammogram (6.2%). Confusion was greatest among women aged 40-49 years and women who had never had a mammogram or who had one more than 2 years ago. Communication about future recommendations should be pretested to identify strategies and language that may reduce confusion among providers, consumers, and advocacy groups.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Mamografia/métodos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Adulto , Comitês Consultivos , Idoso , Coleta de Dados/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Internet , Modelos Logísticos , Mamografia/normas , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde/métodos , Estados Unidos
6.
J Health Care Poor Underserved ; 17(1 Suppl): 124-42, 2006 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16520521

RESUMO

This research is designed to share valuable experiences and transferable principles from program staff of the Legacy/Community Voices initiative who have been involved in planning, implementing, evaluating, and sustaining tobacco control activities in underserved communities. Interviews were conducted with 13 front line staff from 9 sites: Alameda County, California; Detroit, Michigan; El Paso, Texas; Ingham County, Michigan; Miami, Florida; New Mexico; North Carolina; Northern Manhattan; and West Virginia. A model emerged from these interviews that places the life cycle of a program in a central position, with many of the identified themes (working with local champions, obtaining support from multiple partners, increasing organizational capacity) repeated throughout, albeit in different forms at different stages. Reflecting upon wisdom gained and identifying best processes for such work may help ensure that tobacco control programs are developed that are culturally safe and effective in meeting the needs of diverse communities throughout the United States.


Assuntos
Planejamento em Saúde Comunitária/organização & administração , Política de Saúde , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Abandono do Uso de Tabaco/etnologia , Tabagismo/etnologia , Tabagismo/prevenção & controle , Populações Vulneráveis/etnologia , Participação da Comunidade , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Área Carente de Assistência Médica , Desenvolvimento de Programas , Justiça Social , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Estados Unidos , Local de Trabalho
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA