Smart advertising in prescription only medication; aligning it with prescriber’s or consumer’s behavior

IF 1.2 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
M. Menebo
{"title":"Smart advertising in prescription only medication; aligning it with prescriber’s or consumer’s behavior","authors":"M. Menebo","doi":"10.1108/ijphm-06-2020-0057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study has four objectives. First is to investigate and compare the immediate and carryover effects of four pharmaceutical marketing tools (prescriber detailing, medical events, journal ads and direct-to-consumer advertising [DTCA]) on sales. Based on the effect comparisons, the second objective is to determine whether advertising tools that are more compatible with prescriber’s behavior have superior impact on sales. Third is to examine empirical support for the argument that advertising directly to consumers, as a market follower versus leader, has a backfiring effect. Finally, this paper aims to assess the magnitude of variance in sales as a function of each advertising tool.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nData on unit sales and spending (on DTCA, journal ads, events and detailing) ranging 84 months are obtained for six prescription-only cholesterol-reducing brands. First, linearity is checked. Second, evolution versus stationarity is tested by applying the unit-root test. Third, potential endogeneity among variables is assessed with granger causality. Fourth, vector autoregressive model (VAR) that accounts for endogeneity and dynamic interactions is specified. Intercept, seasons and market share are added into the model specification as exogenous variables. Fifth, VAR with akaike selected lags and generalized impulse response are conducted. Finally, sales variance is decomposed with forecast error variance decomposition and Cholesky ordering.\n\n\nFindings\nA 10% increase on detailing or journal ads spending brought an immediate (one month) negative effect on sales in a market leader, whereas that same increase is insignificant in a market follower. A 10% increase on DTCA (vs detailing) spending led to a negative (vs positive) carryover effect for the market follower, giving empirical support to the backfiring effect of DTCA and partial evidentiary support suggested about prescriber friendly advertising. However, DTCA induces a larger short term and longer carryover effect in a market leader, with seven times more effect on sales than what detailing does. In addition, it explains 50% of the variation in sales.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe model applied captures extensive dynamics; hence, findings are robust. The analysis considered comparison in terms of prescriber friendly (vs not) advertising tools and brand market status and thus can make managers rethink strategy of advertising budget allocations. This study also introduced a new look onto DTCA and hence challenges the traditional thought held on consumer advertising response.\n","PeriodicalId":51798,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijphm-06-2020-0057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose This study has four objectives. First is to investigate and compare the immediate and carryover effects of four pharmaceutical marketing tools (prescriber detailing, medical events, journal ads and direct-to-consumer advertising [DTCA]) on sales. Based on the effect comparisons, the second objective is to determine whether advertising tools that are more compatible with prescriber’s behavior have superior impact on sales. Third is to examine empirical support for the argument that advertising directly to consumers, as a market follower versus leader, has a backfiring effect. Finally, this paper aims to assess the magnitude of variance in sales as a function of each advertising tool. Design/methodology/approach Data on unit sales and spending (on DTCA, journal ads, events and detailing) ranging 84 months are obtained for six prescription-only cholesterol-reducing brands. First, linearity is checked. Second, evolution versus stationarity is tested by applying the unit-root test. Third, potential endogeneity among variables is assessed with granger causality. Fourth, vector autoregressive model (VAR) that accounts for endogeneity and dynamic interactions is specified. Intercept, seasons and market share are added into the model specification as exogenous variables. Fifth, VAR with akaike selected lags and generalized impulse response are conducted. Finally, sales variance is decomposed with forecast error variance decomposition and Cholesky ordering. Findings A 10% increase on detailing or journal ads spending brought an immediate (one month) negative effect on sales in a market leader, whereas that same increase is insignificant in a market follower. A 10% increase on DTCA (vs detailing) spending led to a negative (vs positive) carryover effect for the market follower, giving empirical support to the backfiring effect of DTCA and partial evidentiary support suggested about prescriber friendly advertising. However, DTCA induces a larger short term and longer carryover effect in a market leader, with seven times more effect on sales than what detailing does. In addition, it explains 50% of the variation in sales. Originality/value The model applied captures extensive dynamics; hence, findings are robust. The analysis considered comparison in terms of prescriber friendly (vs not) advertising tools and brand market status and thus can make managers rethink strategy of advertising budget allocations. This study also introduced a new look onto DTCA and hence challenges the traditional thought held on consumer advertising response.
处方类药物的智能广告;使其与处方者或消费者的行为保持一致
本研究有四个目的。首先是调查和比较四种药物营销工具(处方详细说明、医疗事件、期刊广告和直接面向消费者的广告[DTCA])对销售的直接和后续影响。基于效果比较,第二个目标是确定更符合处方者行为的广告工具是否对销售有更大的影响。第三是检验实证支持的论点,即直接向消费者做广告,作为市场追随者与领导者,会产生适得其反的效果。最后,本文旨在评估销售差异的大小作为每个广告工具的函数。设计/方法/方法获得了6个仅限处方的降胆固醇品牌84个月的单位销售和支出(DTCA、期刊广告、活动和细节)数据。首先,检验线性度。其次,通过应用单位根检验来检验进化与平稳性。第三,用格兰杰因果关系评价变量间的潜在内生性。第四,指定了考虑内生性和动态相互作用的向量自回归模型(VAR)。在模型规范中加入截距、季节和市场份额作为外生变量。第五,研究了具有akaike选择滞后和广义脉冲响应的VAR。最后,采用预测误差方差分解和Cholesky排序对销售方差进行分解。研究发现,市场领导者在细节或期刊广告上增加10%的支出,会对销售额产生立竿见影的负面影响(一个月),而对市场追随者来说,同样的增长是微不足道的。DTCA(相对于细节)支出增加10%,对市场跟随者产生了负面(相对于积极)的延续效应,这为DTCA的反作用提供了实证支持,并为处方友好广告提供了部分证据支持。然而,在市场领导者中,DTCA会产生更大的短期和长期的结转效应,对销售的影响是细节化的7倍。此外,它还解释了50%的销售差异。所应用的模型捕捉了广泛的动态;因此,研究结果是可靠的。该分析考虑了处方者友好(与不友好)广告工具和品牌市场地位方面的比较,从而可以使管理者重新考虑广告预算分配策略。本研究也引入了对DTCA的新看法,从而挑战了消费者广告反应的传统思想。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信