Subscribe to RSS
Use of Two Online Services as Drug Information Sources for Health Professionals
08 February 2018 (online)
The utility of the online computer services BRS Colleague and Dialog Medical Connection, when used primarily as drug information sources by physicians, nurses, and pharmacists and attitudes toward their use, are described. Study sites included office-based medical practices, a university clinic family medicine group, and a university clinical pharmacy department. Participants had access to either of the computer services during two 9½-month periods. All searches were automatically recorded and analyzed. A total of 1,112 search sessions were conducted (78% by pharmacists, 16% by nurses, 6% by physicians) by 38 of 65 participants. Information which completely answered questions was found for slightly less than one-third of searches. Errors occurred in about 81% of searches which retrieved incomplete information. Lack of time was a major factor which limited use of the services, and infrequent users felt that the services did not fit in well with their daily work routine.
- 1 Schoolman HM. Anatomy, physiology and pathology of biomedical information. West J Med 1982; 137: 460-6.
- 2 Lincoln TL, Korpman RA. Computers, health care, and medical information science. Science 1980; 210: 257-63.
- 3 Williamson JW, German PS, Weiss R, Skinner EA, Bowes F. Health science information management and continuing education of physicians. Ann Intern Med 1989; 110: 151-60.
- 4 Schoolman HM. The impact of electronic computers and other technologies on information resources for the physician. Bull NY Acad Med 1985; 611: 283-9.
- 5 Executive Summary. Louis Harris Survey. Bull NY Acad Med 1989; 65: 644-6.
- 6 Poisson EH. End-user searching in medicine. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1986; 74: 293-9.
- 7 Haynes RB, McKibbon A, Walker CJ, Ryan N, Fitzgerald D, Ramsden MF. Online access to MEDLINE in clinical settings. Ann Intern Med 1990; 112: 78-84.
- 8 Horowitz GL, Jackson JD, Bleich HL. PaperChase. Self-service bibliographic retrieval. JAMA 1983; 250: 2494-9.
- 9 Ludwig L, Mixter JK, Emanuele MA. User attitudes toward end-user literature searching. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1988; 76: 7-13.
- 10 Huth EJ. The information explosion. Bull NY Acad Med 1989; 65: 647-61.
- 11 Covell DG, Uman GC, Manning PR. Information needs in office practice: are they being met?. Ann Intern Med 1985; 103: 596-9.
- 12 Avorn J, Soumerai SB. A new approach to reducing suboptimal drug use. JAMA 1983; 250: 1752-3.
- 13 Abate MA, Shumway JM, Jacknowitz AI, Sinclair G. A method for recording and evaluating end-user searches on a personal computer. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1989; 77: 381-3.
- 14 Shumway JM, Jacknowitz AI, Abate MA. Physicians’, pharmacists’ and nurses’ attitudes toward the use of computers to access drug information. Meth Inform Med 1990; 29: 99-103.
- 15 Osiobe SA. Use of information resources by health professionals: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1985; 21: 965-73.
- 16 Porter D, Wigton RS, Reidelbach MA, Bleich HL, Slack WV. Self-service computerized bibliographic retrieval: a comparison of Colleague and PaperChase, programs that search the MEDLINE data base. Comp Biomed Res 1988; 21: 488-501.
- 17 Souney PF, Churchill WW, Kaul AF. Cost of implementing and maintaining a hospital-pharmacy-based online literature search system. Am J Hosp Pharm 1985; 42: 2496-8.
- 18 John K. Medical literature searches – how many bibliographic databases are needed for sufficient retrieval in medical topics?. Meth Inform Med 1985; 24: 163-5.