In the area of communicating with patients, whether delivered by a pharmaceutical company, an NGO, a charity or a public health agency, the priority is clear: the audience is the patient and the message is something for them to act upon. It is not complicated. Critical information needs to be delivered in a way that is accessible, actionable and easily understood. Many patient-facing documents fall into a common design trap: placing logos or corporate branding in prime visual areas. This unintentionally disrupts the flow of vital information.

In the last article, I wrote about what eye-tracking studies and heat map research can teach us about reading. In Western cultures, readers tend to follow familiar trajectories of reading texts such as the Z- and F-patterns, where the eyes naturally gravitate towards the top-left, upper headings and key horizontal lines of a page before moving downwards. Where the eyes rest on the page or the screen are described as ‘hot zones’. This is where attention is highest and where crucial information should be placed. This is the prime real estate in document design.

When we apply learnings from these studies to patient-facing materials, such as informed consent forms, clinical outcome assessments (COAs), medication guides or health promotion campaigns, the implications are significant. Patients, their caregivers and the public are expecting to read information that answers their immediate concerns: What does this mean for me? What actions am I supposed to take?

Not Useful in Patient Communication

Logos and branding elements, while important for organisational identity, do not directly serve these needs of the patients. When placed along primary reading paths, such as the top-left corner or adjacent to key messages, they risk becoming visual ‘noise’. This can easily divert attention from essential content like instructions, risks, warnings or what the vital next steps are to take. This can compromise comprehension and reduce the effectiveness of communication at the exact moment when clear communication matters most.

In industries like pharma, there may be regulatory requirements for disclosing the sponsor’s identity, but the prominence of logos need to be carefully considered without compromising compliance. For NGOs, charities and public health organisations the situation is similar. Logos can convey trustworthiness and credibility: you know that something coming from the Gates’ Foundation about infectious diseases is not going to be garbage. However, over-emphasising logos in patient-directed materials could detract from empowering patients with information that can help them.

Best practice suggests that branding should be repositioned to more peripheral zones of the page or screen. The footer, margins or back pages of a document are ideal alternatives. This would reserve high-attention areas for content that supports understanding and informed decision-making.

In high-stakes communications that is typical of patient information, this becomes particularly relevant. This is important when patients are providing informed consent for participation in clinical studies or when navigating complex treatment instructions. In these scenarios, the cognitive burden on the patient is already high. Introducing branding and corporate information that are not essential to the message only adds to this load. Patients are far more likely to benefit from materials where their eye movements are guided smoothly from headline to core content to call-to-action, without any distractions.

For public health campaigns and health literacy initiatives driven by charitable organisations, NGOs or health authorities like our National Health Service (NHS), the principle is just the same. Placing logos subtly in non-disruptive areas still allows organisations to maintain their visibility while respecting the reader’s information processing journey through the material.

The goal of patient-facing communication is not to market a brand, but to create understanding and trust. It is to help improve a person’s health outcomes. By aligning document design with evidence from eye-tracking and heat map studies, organisations can create better, more patient-centred materials. Removing branding from prime real estate on the page or screen is a simple but powerful adjustment that allows patients to focus on what matters most: the information that helps them make informed, confident decisions about their health.

I have written in earlier articles about the emphasis that companies and organisations place on the Patient Voice. I stated that the level of sincerity of this commitment is often revealed in subtle and surprising ways. Logo placement in information intended for patients is one of them. Have the briefest look online at communications to the public from pharma, NGOs, public health organisations and see how prominent their respective logos are and where they are positioned. Perhaps this is something you have not thought about before, but when you take a critical view of this, you will see that logos and branding are usually placed in areas that could be better used for important messages to patients.

Thank you for reading,

Mark Gibson

Leeds, United Kingdom, March 2025