The authors analyze primary demand effects of marketing efforts directed at the physician (detailing and professional journal advertising) versus marketing efforts directed at the patient (direct-to-consumer advertising). The analysis covers 86 categories, or approximately 85% of the U.S. pharmaceutical market, during the 2001–2005 period. Primary demand effects are rather small, in contrast with the estimated sales effects for individual brands. By using a new brand-level method to estimate primary demand effects with aggregate data, the authors show that the small effects are due to intense competitive interactions during the observation period but not necessarily to low primary demand responsiveness. In contrast with previous studies, the authors also find that detailing is more effective in driving primary demand than direct-to-consumer advertising. A category sales model cannot provide such insights. In addition, a category sales model likely produces biased predictions about period-by-period changes in primary demand. The suggested brand-level method does not suffer from these limitations.
ArellanoManual, (2003), Panel Data Econometrics.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
AroraNeeraj, AllenbyGreg M., and GinterJames L., (1998), “A Hierarchical Bayes Model of Primary and Secondary Demand,”Marketing Science, 17(1), 29–44.
3.
BelsleyDavid, A., (1991), Conditioning Diagnostics: Collinearity and Weak Data in Regression.New York: John Wiley & Sons.
4.
BerndtErnst R., BuiLinda, ReilyDavid R., and UrbanGlen L., (1995), “Information, Marketing, and Pricing in the U.S. Antiulcer Drug Market,”American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, 85(2), 100–105.
5.
BerndtErnst R., and Eugene SavinN., (1975), “Estimation and Hypothesis Testing in Singular Equation Systems with Autoregressive Disturbances,”Econometrica, 43(5–6), 937–57.
6.
BodapatiAnand, and GuptaSachin, (2004), “The Recoverability of Segmentation Structure from Store-Level Aggregate Data,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(August), 351–64.
7.
BowmanDouglas, and GatignonHubert, (1996), “Order of Entry as a Moderator of the Effect of the Marketing Mix on Market Share,”Marketing Science, 15(3), 222–42.
8.
BrockhoffKlaus, (1967), “A Test for the Product Life Cycle,”Econometrica, 35(3–4), 472–84.
9.
CalfeeJohn E., WinstonClifford, and StempskiRandolph, (2002), “Direct-to-Consumer Advertising and the Demand for Cholesterol-Reducing Drugs,”Journal of Law and Economics, 45(October), 673–90.
10.
CarpenterGregory S., and NakamotoKent, (1989), “Consumer Preference Formation and Pioneering Advantage,”Journal of Marketing Research, 26(August), 285–98.
11.
ChintaguntaPradeep K., and DesirajuRamarao, (2005), “Strategic Pricing and Detailing Behavior in International Markets,”Marketing Science, 24(1), 67–80.
12.
ChintaguntaPradeep K., DubéJean-Pierre, and GohKhim Yong, (2005), “Beyond the Endogeneity Bias: The Effect of Unmeasured Brand Characteristics on Household-Level Brand Choice Models,”Management Science, 51(5), 832–49.
13.
EllisonSara Fisher, CockburnIain, GrilichesZvi, and HausmanJerry, (1997), “Characteristics of Demand for a Pharmaceutical Product: An Examination of Four Cephalosporins,”RAND Journal of Economics, 28(3), 426–46.
14.
EphMRA (2006), “EphMRA Anatomical Classification Guidelines 2006,”European Pharmaceutical Marketing Research Association, (accessed January 30, 2006), [available at http://www.ephmra.org].
15.
FischerMarc, ShankarVenkatesh, and ClementMichel, (2005), “Can a Late Mover Use International Market Entry Strategy to Challenge the Pioneer?” MSI Report No. 05–118. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
GuadagniPeter M., and LittleJohn D.C., (1983), “A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data,”Marketing Science, 2(3), 203–238.
18.
GuptaSunil, (1988), “Impact of Sales Promotion on When, What, and How Much to Buy,”Journal of Marketing Research, 25(November), 342–55.
19.
HanssensDominique M., ParsonsLeonard J., and SchultzRandall L., (2001), Market Response Models, Econometric and Time Series Analysis, 2d ed.Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
20.
HollonMatthew, F., (1999), “Direct-to-Consumer Marketing of Prescription Drugs, Creating Consumer Demand,”Journal of the American Medical Association, 281(4), 382–84.
21.
IizukaToshiaki, and JinGinger Z., (2005), “The Effect of Prescription Drug Advertising on Doctor Visits,”Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 14(3), 701–727.
22.
JohnstonJ., (1984), Econometric Methods, 3d ed.New York: McGraw-Hill.
23.
KalyanaramGurumurthy, RobinsonWilliam T., and UrbanGlen L., (1995), “Order of Market Entry: Established Empirical Generalizations, Emerging Empirical Generalizations, and Future Research,”Marketing Science, 14(3/2), G212–21.
ManchandaPuneet, and HonkaElisabeth, (2005), “The Effects and Role of Direct-to-Physician Marketing in the Pharmaceutical Industry: An Integrative Review,”Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law and Ethics, 5(2), 785–822.
26.
NairHarikesh, DubéJean-Pierre, and ChintaguntaPradeep, (2005), “Accounting for Primary and Secondary Demand Effects with Aggregate Data,”Marketing Science, 24(3), 444–60.
27.
NarayananSridhar, DesirajuRamarao, and ChintaguntaPradeep K., (2004), “Return on Investment Implications for Pharmaceutical Promotional Expenditures: The Role of Marketing-Mix Interactions,”Journal of Marketing, 68(October), 90–105.
28.
NijsVincent R., DekimpeMarnik G., SteenkampJan-Benedict E.M., and HanssensDominique M., (2001), “The Category-Demand Effects of Price Promotions,”Marketing Science, 20(1), 1–22.
29.
RosenthalMeredith B., BerndtErnst R., DonohueJulie M., FrankRichard G., and EpsteinArnold M., (2003), “Demand Effects of Recent Changes in Prescription Drug Promotion,” working paper, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health.
30.
SethuramanRaj, and TellisGerard J., (1991), “An Analysis of the Trade-Off Between Advertising and Price Discounting,”Journal of Marketing Research, 28(May), 160–74.
31.
SorescuAlina B., ChandyRajesh K., and PrabhuJaideep C., (2003), “Sources and Financial Consequences of Radical Innovation: Insights from Pharmaceuticals,”Journal of Marketing, 67(October), 82–102.
32.
SrinivasanShuba, PauwelsKoen, HanssensDominique M., and DekimpeMarnik G., (2004), “Do Promotions Benefit Manufacturers, Retailers, or Both?”Management Science, 50(5), 617–29.
33.
TellisGerard J., and FransesPhilip Hans, (2006), “Optimal Data Interval for Estimating Advertising Response,”Marketing Science, 25(3), 217–29.
34.
UrbanG.L., CarterT., GaskinS., and MuchaZ., (1986), “Market Share Rewards to Pioneering Brands: An Empirical Analysis and Strategic Implications,”Management Science, 32(6), 645–59.
35.
Van HeerdeHarald J., GuptaSachin, and WittinkDick R., (2003), “Is 75% of the Sales Promotion Bump Due to Brand Switching? No, Only 33% Is,”Journal of Marketing Research, 40(November), 481–91.
36.
Van HeerdeHarald J., LeeflangPeter S.H., and WittinkDick R., (2004), “Decomposing the Sales Promotion Bump with Store Data,”Marketing Science, 23(3), 317–34.
37.
Van HeerdeHarald J., MelaCarl F., and ManchandaPuneet, (2004), “The Dynamic Effect of Innovation on Market Structure,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(May), 166–83.
38.
VermuntJeroen K., and MagidsonKay, (2005), Technical Guide for Latent GOLD 4.0: Basic and Advanced.Belmont, MA: Statistical Innovations Inc.
39.
WilkesMichael S., BellRobert A., and KravitzRichard L., (2000), “Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising: Trends, Impact, and Implications,”Health Affairs, 9(2), 110–28.
40.
WittinkDick, R., (2002), “Analysis of ROI for Pharmaceutical Promotions (ARPP),” presentation to the Association of Medical Publications, (October 26, 2005), [available at http://www.vioworks.com/clients/amp].
41.
WolfeSidney, M., (2002), “Direct-to-Consumer Advertising—Education or Promotion?”The New England Journal of Medicine, 346(7), 524–26.
42.
WosinskaMarta, (2002), “Just What the Patient Ordered? Direct-to-Consumer Advertising and the Demand for Pharmaceutical Products,” Working Paper No. 03–058, Harvard Business School, Harvard University.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
