Navigation

    Forum

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups

    Requesting clarity on "Proven" claims

    PAAB Q&A
    2
    2
    86
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • U
      Username last edited by

      Hello, I was hoping you could provide some clarity on why the claim "Proven efficacy" can appear without the direct association of supporting data, and why this is not considered an unsubstantiated claim when it appears with the indication, and if this would also apply to claims of "Proven safety".

      Jennifer Carroll 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Jennifer Carroll
        Jennifer Carroll @Username last edited by

        Hello @username

        The copy “Proven efficacy” CANNOT stand on it’s own. It must be immediately supported by the indication which sets the limitations of the copy ”proven efficacy” as assessed and authorized by Health Canada. The indication acts as the ‘supporting copy’. The copy “proven efficacy” should not appear above single study findings as it overstates the level of evidence of single past tense study findings.

        “Proven safety” is not acceptable since it is absolute. One could use the copy “Proven safety profile” if it is immediately supported with the most common adverse events and percent incidences from the PM. This reflects the safety profile that Health Canada has assessed in order to grant market authorization.

        Note that either example "Proven efficacy" or "Proven safety profile" would also prompt the inclusion of the highest level fair balance.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • First post
          Last post