Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 216–221 | Cite as

Critical appraisal of apparently evidence-based written advertising in Pakistan

  • Dileep Kumar RohraEmail author
  • Muhammad Umair Bashir
  • Ummey Aymen Khwaja
  • Muhammad Ressam Nazir
Short Research Report


Objectives The objective of the study was to critically assess references cited in support of claims in drug advertisements. Methods Drug advertising brochures were collected from privately practicing General Practitioners from different parts of Karachi. Three blinded reviewers then categorized each reference in the brochure according to the sources viz: journals (both Medline indexed and non-indexed), medical reference books, web addresses, personal communications or testimonials, abstracts presented at symposia/conferences, WHO and National Health Guidelines, ‘data on file’ and ‘others’ (which included a diverse set of references). Each reviewer then assessed and analyzed the references further into 2 broad categories: traceable and non-traceable. Traceable references were appraised and, depending upon the claim with which the reference was attached, were classified into justifiable, inaccurate/false, exaggerated and ambiguous. Results We collected a total of 175 different brochures. Thirty-nine (22.3%) brochures did not cite any references and were not subjected to further analysis. The remaining 136 (77.7%) contained a total of 559 references. 305 (54.6%) of these references were from Medline-indexed journals; 67 (12.0%) were from non-indexed journals; 55 (9.8%) references quoted medical reference books; 27 (4.8%) references cited web addresses; 12 (2.1%) references were personal communications/testimonials; 11 (2.0%) references referred to abstracts presented at symposia/conferences; 12 (2.1%) references were from WHO and National Health Guidelines; 8 (1.4%) references were listed as ‘data on file’, while the remainder that could not be defined were classified as ‘others’ (13.1%). Out of a total of 559 references, 249 (44.5%) could not be traced. After critically analyzing the 310 traceable references, 197 (63.5%) were adjudged justifiable, 30 (9.7%) inaccurate/false, 79 (25.5%) exaggerated and 15 (4.8%) ambiguous. Conclusion Results of this study show for the first time that the claims substantiated with references in the pharmaceutical advertisements in Pakistan are highly unreliable.


Advertisements Drug promotion Evidence based advertising Marketing Pakistan 



The authors wish to thank the Department of Biological and Biomedical sciences, Aga Khan University, Karachi for bearing the costs of this study and publication.


No funding received.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.


  1. 1.
    Rohra DK, Gilani AH, Memon IK, et al. Critical evaluation of the claims made by pharmaceutical companies in drug promotional material in Pakistan. J Pharm Pharm Sci 2006;9:50–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Silverman M, Lee PR, Lydecker M. The drugging of the Third World. Int J Health Serv 1982;12:585–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee PR, Lurie P, Silverman MM, Lydecker M. Drug promotion and labeling in developing countries: an update. J Clin Epidemiol 1991;44 Suppl 2:S49–55.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rohra DK, Jawaid A, Rehman T, Sukkurwala AQ, Palanpurwala AS, Gangwani R. Prescription of new drugs by general practitioners in Pakistan: an exploration into information sources, prescription influences and general attitudes. Pak J Med Res 2007;46:5–10.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Levy R. The role and value of pharmaceutical marketing. Arch Fam Med 1994;3:327–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6. Accessed on July 10, 2007.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Gutknecht DR. Evidence-based advertising? A survey of four major journals. J Am Board Fam Pract 2001;14:197–200.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bero LA, Galbraith A, Rennie D. The publication of sponsors symposiums in medical journals. N Engl J Med 1992; 327:1135–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wilkes MS, Doblin BH, Shapiro MF. Pharmaceutical advertisements in leading medical journals: experts’ assessments. Ann Intern Med 1992;116:912–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gonul F. Promotion of prescription drugs and its impact on the physician’s choice behaviour. J Market 2001;216:79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jones MI, Greenfield SM, Bradley CP. Prescribing new drugs: qualitative study of influences on consultants and general practitioners. Br Med J 2001;323:378–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Health IMS. Total US promotional spend by type, 2004, 2005. [,2777,6599_49695992_75406357,00,htm]. Accessed on July 30, 2006).
  15. 15.
    Herxheimer A, Stalsby Lundborg C, Westerholm B. Advertisements for medicines in medical journals; a collaborative international study. Report for director-general of World Health Organisation, Sweden: WHO,1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dileep Kumar Rohra
    • 1
    Email author
  • Muhammad Umair Bashir
    • 2
  • Ummey Aymen Khwaja
    • 3
  • Muhammad Ressam Nazir
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biological and Biomedical SciencesAga Khan UniversityKarachiPakistan
  2. 2.Faculty of Health SciencesAga Khan University KarachiPakistan
  3. 3.Dow University of Health SciencesKarachiPakistan

Personalised recommendations