The packages of over-the-counter medications provide consumers with plenty of information. But a study from researchers at Michigan State University found that marketing claims and brand names overshadow critical fine print on medications, even though some of this information is supposed to be “prominent” and “conspicuous.” 

 

In a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, the researchers examined the effectiveness of two required warnings on over-the-counter medications. “We wanted to quantify how well warning statements in over-the-counter drug packaging were working to convey information to consumers,” says Laura Bix, an assistant professor in the MSU School of Packaging and lead author of the study, which appeared in the online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science. “To be effective, warnings about the lack of a child-resistant feature, or those that alert consumers to potential tampering of the product, need to be read and comprehended at the time of purchase.”

 

Medicine labels carry a range of information. In addition to brand identification, descriptions of contents, quantity, price, and ingredients, they also carry directions, dosage information, barcodes, and warning statements. Federal regulations require packages that do not have a child-resistant feature, for example, to conspicuously state that the product is not intended for homes with small children.

 

Bix and her colleagues quantified the relative prominence and conspicuousness of five different label elements on the packages of over-the-counter pain-killers: the tamper-evident warning, the child-resistant warning, the brand name, the drug facts information, and statement of claims such as “extra strength.” They also evaluated how well test subjects remembered information presented on the product packaging.

 

Using an eye-tracking device, the researchers found that people spent the most time looking at the brand of the product and significantly less time looking at the tamper-evident and child-resistant warnings. Study participants also recalled the brand of the products at a higher rate. While two-thirds recalled one or more brands that they viewed during the course of the study, only 18 percent recalled warnings related to alcohol and 8.2 percent recalled that the product was not to be used in households with young children. Not one subject recalled warnings about tamper-evident features.

 

The researchers also found that the brand and product claims were significantly more legible than the warning statements. They noted that the higher legibility of the brand name wasn’t surprising, given the importance of brand identification in purchasing decisions.

 

“Little specific guidance exists from the federal government regarding what it means to be ‘prominent’ or ‘conspicuous,’ yet, this term is used quite frequently in the regulations that dictate labeling for a variety of product,” Bix says. “Our findings call into question whether these warnings are working, but do not indicate why. An array of reasons should be investigated: these could include design and graphics, consumer experience and previous knowledge and whether or not consumers recognize the potential consequences of missing or disregarding this information.”

 

The researchers say finding effective ways to get people to read and heed warnings on over-the-counter drugs is critical to their safety and well-being as well as those around them—especially children.