Quality of pharmaceutical advertising and gender bias in medical journals (1998-2008): a review of the scientific literature

Objective: To review the scientific literature on pharmaceutical advertising aimed at health professionals in order to determine whether gender bias has decreased and the quality of information in pharmaceutical advertising has improved over time. Methods: We performed a content analysis of original articles dealing with medical drug promotion (1998-2008), according to quality criteria such as (a) the number, validity and accessibility of bibliographic references provided in pharmaceutical advertising and (b) the extent to which gender representations were consistent with the prevalence of the diseases. Databases: PUBMED, Medline, Scopus, Sociological Abstract, Eric and LILACS. Results: We reviewed 31 articles that analyzed advertising in medical journals from 1975-2005 and were published between 1998 and 2008. We found that the number of references used to support pharmaceutical advertising claims increased from 1975 but that 50% of these references were not valid. There was a tendency to depict men in paid productive roles, while women appeared inside the home or in non-occupational social contexts. Advertisements for psychotropic and cardiovascular drugs overrepresented women and men respectively. Conclusions: The use of bibliographic references increased between 1998 and 2008. However, representation of traditional male-female roles was similar in 1975 and 2005. Pharmaceutical advertisements may contribute to reinforcing the perception that certain diseases are associated with the most frequently portrayed sex.

Does the scientific evidence support the advertising claims made for products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis? A systematic review

Background To analyse the scientific evidence that exists for the advertising claims made for two products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis and to conduct a comparison between the published literature and what is presented in the corporate website. Methods Systematic review, using Medline through Pubmed and Embase. We included human clinical trials that exclusively measured the effect of Lactobacillus casei or Bifidobacterium lactis on a healthy population, and where the objective was related to the health claims made for certain products in advertising. We assessed the levels of evidence and the strength of the recommendation according to the classification criteria established by the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM). We also assessed the outcomes of the studies published on the website that did not appear in the search. Results Of the 440 articles identified, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Only four (25%) of these presented a level of evidence of 1b and a recommendation grade of A, all corresponding to studies on product containing Bifidobacterium lactis, and only 12 of the 16 studies were published on the corporate website (47). Conclusions There is insufficient scientific evidence to support the health claims made for these products, especially in the case of product containing Lactobacillus casei.