HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wallace, L. S. Articles by Weiss, B. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wallace, L. S. Articles by Weiss, B. D.

LORRAINE S. WALLACE, PH.D., is Associate Professor, and EDWIN S. ROGERS, PH.D., is Associate Professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine (UTGSM), Knoxville. LORI W. TURNER, PH.D., is Associate Professor, Department of Health Science, University of Arkansas, Fay-etteville. AMY J. KEENUM, D.O., PHARM.D., is Assistant Professor, Department of Family Medicine, UTGSM. BARRY D. WEISS, M.D., is Professor, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Address correspondence to Dr. Wallace at the Department of Family Medicine, University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, 1924 Alcoa Highway, U-67, Knoxville, TN 37920 (lwallace{at}mc.utmck.edu).

Purpose. The suitability, readability, and cultural appropriateness of written supplemental materials available on the Internet for nonprescription medications were examined. Methods. We videotaped 48 hours of television programming, recording a total of 152 advertisements highlighting 37 unique nonprescription medications. The supplemental materials corresponding to each advertised medication were downloaded and printed in their entirety from each product-specific Web site. These materials were assessed using the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) instrument. Total SAM scores were grouped as follows: not suitable (0–39%), adequate (40–69%), and superior (70–100%). The Fry readability formula was used to determine the reading grade level for the materials assessed with the SAM instrument. Results. The mean ± S.D. SAM score of all materials was 54.9% ± 0.1% (range, 38–76%). Materials for the majority of drugs (86.5%, n = 32) were rated adequate. Materials for four drugs (10.8%) were rated superior, and the material for one drug was not suitable. While the total SAM scores were adequate for most of the materials evaluated, the majority of materials scored particularly poorly for their reading level (the materials for 81.1% of drugs were not suitable). The materials for 40.9% of drugs used uncommon words. Conclusion. Evaluation of the suitability, readability, and cultural appropriateness of written supplemental materials for nonprescription medications available on manufacturer-sponsored Web sites and intended for consumers or patients revealed that SAM scores were adequate for most of the materials; however, many scored poorly in the areas of reading level and used uncommon words. Index terms: Advertising; Computers; Drug information; Drugs, nonprescription; Ethnic groups; Industry, pharmaceutical; Internet; Patient information; Readability

 

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. E. Roskos, L. S. Wallace, and B. D. Weiss Readability of consumer medication information for intranasal corticosteroid inhalers Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., January 1, 2008; 65(1): 65 - 68. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]