Introduction:

It has been reported that 15% of the promotional products from the pharmaceutical industry (PI) include information not supported by the results of the original research.

Objective:

Evaluate the validity of the scientific information that supports the data included in the pharmaceutical industry promotional brochures for internists and cardiologists and reconcile the information.

Method:

Promotional brochures were collected during national conferences of Internal Medicine (IM) and Cardiology (C), and 10 promotional brochures of each medical specialty were randomly selected. Three researchers evaluated the quality of the references, and the validity of the original research and compared the information from the promotional brochure and the original publication. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed.

Results:

57 IM and 16 C promotional brochures were collected; the quality of the references of 4 promotional brochures from IM was classified as “moderate” evidence and the references of 4 promotional from C were identified as “non-scientific” evidence. Clinical trials of IM and C were evaluated as valid and an observational study of C was classified as invalid. Comparison between promotional information and the original study detected differences in four IM and four C promotions, according to the ethical criteria for the promotion of medicines by the World Health Organization (WHO) the lack of accuracy predominated, and in some cases, the information was not reliable and/or true.

Conclusions:

Training in critical lectures is crucial for medical doctors. This will allow them a critical review of promotional information from PI, to identify the ones that may lead to inappropriate prescription.