Am J Health-Syst Pharm
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Clauson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Van, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Clauson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Van, T.
American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, Vol 61, Issue 10, 1015-1024
Copyright © 2004 by American Society of Health-System Pharmacists

Articles

Evaluation of drug information databases for personal digital assistants

KA Clauson, MJ Seamon, AS Clauson, and TB Van


PURPOSE: Core and supplemental drug information databases available for use with personal digital assistants (PDAs) were evaluated. METHODS: Ten core (or standalone) databases, six drug interaction analyzers, and three dietary supplement databases used with the Palm and Pocket PC operating systems were selected for study. The databases were rated for scope (the absence or presence of an answer to a drug information question), completeness (the comprehensiveness of an answer), and ease of use (the number of hypertext links needed to reach the desired answer). A total of 14 weighted categories, consisting of 146 and 30 drug questions for the core and supplemental databases, respectively, were used to determine the overall scores. RESULTS: The best overall performers were, in order of total scores, Lexi-Drugs Platinum, Tarascon Pocket Pharmacopoeia, ePocrates Rx Pro, and Clinical Pharmacology OnHand. The databases with the lowest composite scores were Triple i Prescribing Guide and A2Z Drugs. CONCLUSION: Drug information databases for PDAs varied in scope, completeness, and ease of use. The results may help clinicians find the most appropriate product for their practice setting.
 



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
F. Yu, T. K. Houston, M. N. Ray, D. Q. Garner, and E. S. Berner
Patterns of Use of Handheld Clinical Decision Support Tools in the Clinical Setting
Med Decis Making, December 1, 2007; 27(6): 744 - 753.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 QJMHome page
M.F. Dallenbach, P.A. Bovier, and J. Desmeules
Detecting drug interactions using personal digital assistants in an out-patient clinic
QJM, November 1, 2007; 100(11): 691 - 697.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
R. S. Gerstle, C. U. Lehmann, and the Council on Clinical Information Technology
Electronic Prescribing Systems in Pediatrics: The Rationale and Functionality Requirements
Pediatrics, June 1, 2007; 119(6): e1413 - e1422.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
K. E Keplar, C. J Urbanski, and D. S Kania
Update on Personal Digital Assistant Applications for the Healthcare Provider
Ann. Pharmacother., May 1, 2005; 39(5): 892 - 907.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.