Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Theory on the Relativity of Factors Impacting the Utilization of Medical Information Services From the Pharmaceutical Industry

  • Policy: Analytical Report
  • Published:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Health care providers have many options for obtaining answers to their questions about pharmaceutical products. These options include drug information curators and aggregators such as ePocrates, WebMD, and Wikipedia, as well as professional journals. However, drug information obtained directly from a pharmaceutical company is arguably the best source of information regarding that company’s medicine. This is because medical information (MI) professionals from the pharmaceutical industry have the product expertise, technical skills, and access to relevant information that enable current, evidence-based, and scientifically accurate information to be provided. Further, it is reasonable to assume that “good” information leads to better patient decisions and therefore better patient outcomes. Several factors are implicated in the use of a pharmaceutical company’s medical information resource. These factors include, but are not limited to, awareness of the availability of the resource, ease of access, and trust of the information. In this paper, the authors discuss the relevance of these factors and propose an integrated relational theory (referred to as the “MI Theory of Relativity”) to model the utilization and value of a medical information service.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Manhattan Research. Taking the Pulse® U.S. Survey 2015. Decision Resources Group. New York, NY.

  2. US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: Responding to unsolicited requests for off-label information about prescription drugs and medical devices (Draft Guidance) 2011. Washington, DC. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM285145.pdf?source=govdelivery. Published December 2011. Accessed November 27, 2015.

  3. Santhouse A, Albano D. Evaluation of Wyeth medical communications written responses and the impact on prescribing. Drug Inf J. 2003;37:445–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Black P, Marsh C, Ashworth L. Assessment of customer satisfaction with verbal responses provided by a pharmaceutical company’s third-party medical information call center. Drug Inf J. 2009;43:263–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fett R, Bruns K, Lischka-Wittmann SL. Results of a qualitative market research study evaluating the quality of medical letters. Drug Inf J. 2009;43:697–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fung S, Merriman L, Cawley M. Assessing medical information needs via an internet-based survey. Drug Inf J 2009;43:509–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sermo© WorldOne. Medical Information Awareness Survey, June 2014. New York, NY.

  8. Clauson KA, Polen HH, Boulos MNK, Dzenowagis JH. Scope, completeness, and accuracy of drug information in Wikipedia. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42:1814–1821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Prescriptions Medicine Code of Practice Authority Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry 2015. http://www.pmcpa.org.uk/thecode/Documents/PMCPA%20Code%20of%20Practice%202015-NOV14_WEB.pdf. Accessed November 27, 2015.

  10. Medicine Australia. Code of Conduct, 18th Edition 2015 https://medicinesaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2010/01/20150617-PUB-Code-Edition-18-FINAL.pdf. Accessed November 27, 2015.

  11. Brennan N, Edwards S, Kelly N, Miller A, Harrower L, Mattick K. Qualified doctor and medical students’ use of resources for accessing information: What is used and why?. Health Info Libr J. 2014;31:204–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bennett NL, Casebeer LL, Kristofco RE, Strasser SM. Physicians’ Internet information-seeking behaviors. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2004;24:31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Google, Hall and Partners. Connecting with physicians online: searching for answers (US, November 2009). http://www.gstatic.com/ads/research/en/2009_ConnectingwithPhysiciansOnline.pdf Accessed December 2, 2015.

  14. Davies K. The information-seeking behavior of doctors: a review of the evidence. Health Info Libr J. 2007;24:78–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Edelman Trust Barometer 2012. Annual Global Study. Global Results. http://www.slideshare.net/EdelmanInsights/2012-edelman-trust-barometer-global-deck Accessed November 29, 2015.

  16. Edelman Trust Barometer 2015. Annual Global Study. Global Results. http://www.slideshare.net/EdelmanInsights/2015-edelman-trust-barometer-global-results Accessed November 29, 2015.

  17. Manhattan Research. ePharma Physician® 2015 Survey. New York, NY.

  18. Lum C, Ahn SM. The correction of product information in drug references and medical textbooks. Drug Inf J. 2012;46:94–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Soares SC, Marsh C. Metrics implementation in an industry-based medical information department and comparison to metrics tracked within other industry-based medical information departments. Drug Inf J. 2008;42:175–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jaisinghani J, Patel S. Training new-hire medical information specialists in the pharmaceutical industry: A benchmarking survey. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science. 2013;47:356–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cadogan A, Fung S. The changing roles of medical communications professionals: Evolution of the core curriculum. Drug Inf J. 2009;43:673–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pfizer, 235 East 42nd Street, New York, NY, 10017, USA

    Dominick Albano PharmD, MBA & Allison Soloff PharmD

  2. University of California–San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Katelyn Heim PharmD(Cand)

  3. Pfizer, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    Sudeep Mavila BTech, MBA

Authors
  1. Dominick Albano PharmD, MBA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Allison Soloff PharmD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katelyn Heim PharmD(Cand)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sudeep Mavila BTech, MBA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominick Albano PharmD, MBA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Albano, D., Soloff, A., Heim, K. et al. A Theory on the Relativity of Factors Impacting the Utilization of Medical Information Services From the Pharmaceutical Industry. Ther Innov Regul Sci 50, 554–559 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479016640019

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479016640019

Keywords

Search

Navigation