MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Making History: Lessons from the Great Moments Series of Pharmaceutical Advertisements

2004· article· en· W2023561715 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan M. Metzl, Joel D. Howell

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical Medical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipPaintingPharmacyFace (sociological concept)Promotion (chess)AdvertisingSociologyMedicineMedia studiesVisual artsArt historyHistoryArtPolitical scienceLawSocial scienceFamily medicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors shed light on present-day pharmaceutical advertisements by looking back to an important early chapter in pharmaceutical company-sponsored promotion: the Great Moments in Medicine and Great Moments in Pharmacy, a series of commercial paintings produced by Parke, Davis & Company between 1948 and 1964. Beginning in the early 1950s, Parke-Davis delivered reproductions of the Great Moments images to physicians and pharmacies throughout the United States and Canada and funded monthly pullout facsimiles in key national magazines. The images also appeared in calendars, popular magazines, and "educational" brochures. By the mid-1960s, articles in both the popular and the medical press lauded the Great Moments for "changing the face of the American doctor's office" while describing the painter, Robert Thom, as the "Norman Rockwell" of medicine. The authors' brief analysis uses source material including popular articles about the Great Moments, existing scholarship, previously unexamined artist's notes, and, ultimately, the images themselves to explain why these seemingly kitschy paintings attained such widespread acclaim. They show how the Great Moments tapped into a 1950s medical climate when doctors were thought of as powerfully independent practitioners, pharmaceutical companies begged the doctor's good graces, and HMOs and health plans were nowhere to be seen. The authors conclude by suggesting that the images offer important lessons for thinking about the many pharmaceutical advertisements that confront present-day doctors, patients, and other consumers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.221
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicHistorical Medical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207