Implied Claims in Drug Advertising: A Review of Recent Literature and Regulatory Actions

• Published in: Health communication Vol. 39; no. 4; pp. 652 - 665
• Main Authors: Aikin, Kathryn J., Boudewyns, Vanessa, Betts, Kevin R., Giombi, Kristen C., Paquin, Ryan S., Brewington, Micaela, Malik, Raahina
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Routledge 01.04.2024; Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
• Subjects: Advertising; Case reports; Consumers; Drug and Narcotic Control - legislation & jurisprudence; Effectiveness; Efficacy; Federal regulation; Government Agencies; Health care; Healthy food; Literature reviews; Material facts; Nonprescription Drugs; Peers; Perceptions; Prescription Drugs; Regulatory agencies; Self regulation; Systematic review; United States; United States
• DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2023.2179717
• ISSN: 1041-0236; 1532-7027

Federal agencies and self-regulatory bodies help to ensure prescription and nonprescription drug promotion contains accurate information; however, false or misleading claims may cause people to have inaccurate perceptions of a drug and inhibit their ability to make informed decisions. We conducted a systematic review assessing evidence from 2012-2021 on how consumers and healthcare providers (HCPs) interpret claims made indirectly or through inference (implied or implicit claims) as well as synthesizing prescription and nonprescription drug advertising claims that have been the subject of regulatory actions from 2017-2021. Our search identified 16 studies from the peer-reviewed literature and 26 letters or case reports issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or National Advertising Division (NAD). Results from peer-reviewed studies suggest that implied claims can result in inferences that may not be warranted by the material facts about the drug. Perceptions of a drug's efficacy and, to a lesser extent, risk, are influenced by implied and explicitly false claims in prescription drug promotion. Claims related to implied superiority and overstatement of efficacy were the most prevalent claims flagged for review and examined in the literature. These types of claims were also the subject of many of the compliance actions by the FDA and case reports from the NAD. More research is needed to understand how people interpret varying types of implied claims and the impact of such claims on key outcomes. From a policy standpoint, understanding how people interpret implied claims can inform how the FDA approaches these claims in the marketplace.