title: Analysis of consumer information brochures on osteoporosis prevention and treatment.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Evidence-based consumer information is a prerequisite for informed decision making. So far, there are no reports on the quality of consumer information brochures on osteoporosis. In the present study we analysed brochures on osteoporosis available in Germany.
  
  
  METHODS
  All printed brochures from patient and consumer advocacy groups, physician and governmental organisations, health insurances, and pharmaceutical companies were initially collected in 2001, and updated in December 2004. Brochures were analysed by two independent researchers using 37 internationally proposed criteria addressing evidence-based content, risk communication, transparency of the development process, and layout and design.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 165 brochures were identified; 59 were included as they specifically targeted osteoporosis prevention and treatment. Most brochures were provided by pharmaceutical companies (n=25), followed by health insurances (n=11) and patient and consumer advocacy groups (n=11). Quality of brochures did not differ between providers. Only 1 brochure presented lifetime risk estimate; 4 mentioned natural course of osteoporosis. A balanced report on benefit versus lack of benefit was presented in 2 brochures and on benefit versus adverse effects in 8 brochures. Four brochures mentioned relative risk reduction, 1 reported absolute risk reduction through hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Out of 28 brochures accessed in 2004 10 still recommended HRT without discussing adverse effects. Transparency of the development process was limited: 25 brochures reported publication date, 26 cited author and only 1 references. In contrast, readability and design was generally good.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The quality of consumer brochures on osteoporosis in Germany is utterly inadequate. They fail to give evidence-based data on diagnosis and treatment options. Therefore, the material is not useful to enhance informed consumer choice.
authors.affiliation: University of Hamburg, Unit of Health Sciences and Education, Hamburg, Germany. Gabriele.Meyer@uni-hamburg.de
authors.forename: Gabriele
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Meyer
authors.forename: Anke
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Steckelberg
authors.forename: Ingrid
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Mühlhauser
references.citation: J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005 Mar;90(3):1294-301
references.pmid: 15598694
references.citation: Lancet. 2006 Jun 17;367(9527):2010-8
references.pmid: 16782492
references.citation: Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2005;99(6):343-51
references.pmid: 16121649
references.citation: BMJ. 1998 Jul 25;317(7153):225-6
references.pmid: 9677206
references.citation: BMJ. 1998 Jul 25;317(7153):263-4
references.pmid: 9677220
references.citation: BMJ. 2004 Jan 17;328(7432):148
references.pmid: 14726344
references.citation: BMJ. 2003 Oct 4;327(7418):767
references.pmid: 14525858
references.citation: JAMA. 2002 Jul 17;288(3):321-33
references.pmid: 12117397
references.citation: BMJ. 2002 Apr 13;324(7342):886-91
references.pmid: 11950740
references.citation: Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004 Spring;20(2):156-66
references.pmid: 15209175
references.citation: Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2001 Aug;95(8):535-8
references.pmid: 11575136