|
|
|
|
LEADER |
02994nam a2200517Ia 4500 |
001 |
10.1186-s40545-020-00293-5 |
008 |
220427s2021 CNT 000 0 und d |
020 |
|
|
|a 20523211 (ISSN)
|
245 |
1 |
0 |
|a The risk-value trade-off: price and brand information impact consumers’ intentions to purchase OTC drugs
|
260 |
|
0 |
|b BioMed Central Ltd
|c 2021
|
856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s40545-020-00293-5
|
520 |
3 |
|
|a Background: European countries face fiscal pressure regarding the long-term sustainability of their healthcare system due to increasing levels of public health expenditures and mounting demographic pressures. The promotion of generic drugs is considered to be an efficient means to tackle these challenges; however, market diffusion remains slow. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of price and brand cues on purchase intentions by means of Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) advertising, and to build on the market cue evaluation model by Dodd et al. Methods: Participants rated purchase intentions on six DTC adverts varying in price and brand information, followed by self-reports on purchase intentions, attitudes towards generics, brand loyalty, price consciousness, as well as perceptions of quality, risk and value. Open-ended questions explored attitudes toward generic drugs. Results: Brand information and purchase intentions were mediated by perceived risk and perceived quality, while price information influenced purchase intention through perceptions of quality, risk and value. Consumers’ purchase behaviour was furthermore influenced by unawareness and misconceptions, past experiences, and advertising as a decision-making tool. Conclusions: Advertisements, including price and brand information, are an important tool to improve consumers’ awareness of the availability of different OTC drugs. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed. © 2021, The Author(s).
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a advertising
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Article
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a attention
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a attitude to health
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a behavior
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Brand
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a consumer
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a decision making
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a direct-to-consumer advertizing
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a drug information
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a drug quality
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a generic drug
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a health care cost
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a health care system
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a human
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a misconception
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a non prescription drug
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a OTC advertisement
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Perceived risk
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a personal experience
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a price
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Price information
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a purchase behaviour
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Purchase intention
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a quality
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a self report
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a thinking
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a unawareness
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a value
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Aufegger, L.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Bicknell, C.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Darzi, A.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Yanar, C.
|e author
|
773 |
|
|
|t Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
|