HealthPrize Technologies, LLC and MeadWestvaco are collaborating to integrate their proven adherence solutions to provide an end-to-end program to pharmaceutical companies, pharmacy chains, and the patients they serve.
Findings based on a survey of 1,150 patient groups (from 58 countries and of differing specialties)Survey conducted mid-November 2014 to mid-January 2015Patient-group feedback on the corporate reputation of the entire pharma industry during 2014Patient-group feedback on the corporate reputation of 37 individual pharma companies in 2014Results for 2014 are compared with those of 2013, 2012, and 2011
The 37 pharma companies reviewed in the study are: AbbVie l Actavis l Allergan l Amgen l Astellas l AstraZeneca l Baxter International l Bayer l Biogen Idec l Boehringer-Ingelheim l Bristol-Myers Squibb l Celgene l Eisai l Eli Lilly (Lilly) l Gilead l GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) l Grũnenthal l Ipsen l Janssen l Lundbeck l Menarini l Merck & Co (USA) l Merck KgA (Germany) l Mylan l Novartis l Novo Nordisk l Otsuka l Pfizer l Roche l Sanofi l Servier l Shire l Stada Arzneimittel l Takeda l Teva l UCB l ViiV Healthcare
The corporate reputation of individual pharma companies (as seen from a patient perspective) shows some significant changes between 2014 and 2013 (37 companies assessed in 2014; 33 companies in 2013).
Bryan Timlin always carries an iPhone and an Android phone.
The 57-year-old is an app and graphic designer with a Michigan company calledOptHub, but he doesn’t carry two phones for work. He carries the iPhone because that’s what he likes, and he carries the Android because it’s what he needs.
The Android phone monitors his behavior. Five years ago, Timlin was diagnosed with rapid-cycling bipolar disorder, a mental illness characterized by four or more manic or depressive episodes a year. Some episodes, he says, can last as long as eight weeks. “Being bipolar is like jumping out of an airplane knowing you don’t have a parachute on,” he says. “You know you’re going to be hurt, but the high is so euphoric that it’s worth the risk. You can deal with the consequences later.” With his Android phone, he hopes to deal with these moments in other ways.
Studies have shown that 60% of Americans turn to the internet for medical advice. It’s obvious how social media naturally seems like another method pharmaceutical companies can quickly and easily advertise to consumers. Are pharmaceutical companies alone in trying to tap into our unconscious? Would you be surprised if I told you that you could be inadvertently perpetuating such behavior?
The U.S. is one of the few countries that permits direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals. We’ve all see the ads that ramble on about all the potential risks and side effects associated with various medications. No doubt you’ve probably been bombarded with flashy sidebars on the internet promoting one medication or another — some creepily relevant to our own medical conditions. As social media became a part of life for many of us, pharmaceutical companies were quick to exploit the medium. Platforms like Twitter are free to operate and far-reaching. Only until recently has there been a greater effort to regulate the content being disseminated to the public.
In this day and age, Big Pharma might not be quite as cavalier as you might expect. A quick search on Twitter says it all. Almost every major drug company has a verified Twitter account. While companies are generous in providing general medical knowledge or the update here or there that says the company is actively researching condition X, seldom do you find anything plugging a specific product.
Direct-to-consumer advertising on social media has revealed many challenges. Sometimes 140 characters simply isn’t enough to convey all the benefits let alone the black box warnings a drug may possess. The “Twitterverse” is an international community, and messages applicable to one population could wrongfully passed on to another. Some medications banned by one country may be promoted by individuals and corporations of another country. In fact, Glaxo Smith-Kline and AstraZeneca reportedly have disclaimers on their Facebook sites saying that information is “intended for US residents/consumers only.”
But how often are pharmaceutical companies really harping on their own products on Twitter? More likely than not, individuals are weighing in with their micro-reviews on Twitter. Some would argue that these posts could impact consumers. Bad experiences often motivate people to say something. What about the positive reviews? Who is really behind the tweets gushing about Medication XYZ?
So far, individuals aren’t being held accountable for claims they make. Should the FDA as individuals to report their disclosures? Should the FDA be verifying all social media posts that mention a drug? Something tells me there no room in the FDA budget for this. Others would go as far as to argue that this violates the first amendment.
In June 2014, the FDA released suggested guidelines to regulate social media posts by drug companies. Essentially for every post claiming benefit of a certain medication, the FDA is demanding equal reporting of risks and a link to more information to go with it. Sounds impossible to squeeze all that into 140 characters, and perhaps it these guidelines were meant to deter drug companies from using social media altogether to promote their products.
Let’s take a step back to ask ourselves a few questions:
Do you think the FDA is being fair to drug companies, or should we be hearing about the risks/benefits of toilet paper or have the nutrition facts be mandated for a tweet promoting candy bars? Do you think such regulations are resulting in adverse effects by deterring some individuals from learning about some medications? As mentioned earlier, should individuals be subjected to the same rules? Should all our tweets be regulated as potential advertisement for whichever product is mentioned?
To read the other posts in Austin Chiang’s Healthcare & Social Media series, click here.
Google is commoditising medical information - this is going to be a direct clash with some big editors and publishers around such as WebMD and the rest - each country has their own, thinking language will protect them, but my bets are on the customer (patient) choosing the depth of Google over time as their pockets are deep enough to sponsor a mammoth initiative!
Adrian Cunning’s startup, ThriveStreams, has released its first product, according to CNET.
The newly released app takes a gamified approach to mood tracking for those with conditions such as depression and bipolar disorder. Cunning was diagnosed as bipolar in 2002 and has said that his own battle with the disorder inspired him to serve others with mental health struggles.
Discover how doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other healthcare professionals all over the world are using public social media in their professional lives. In the video above you’ll see examples of healthcare professionals connecting together online using Twitter, Google+, blogs…Read more ›
Sharing your scoops to your social media accounts is a must to distribute your curated content. Not only will it drive traffic and leads through your content, but it will help show your expertise with your followers.
How to integrate my topics' content to my website?
Integrating your curated content to your website or blog will allow you to increase your website visitors’ engagement, boost SEO and acquire new visitors. By redirecting your social media traffic to your website, Scoop.it will also help you generate more qualified traffic and leads from your curation work.
Distributing your curated content through a newsletter is a great way to nurture and engage your email subscribers will developing your traffic and visibility.
Creating engaging newsletters with your curated content is really easy.