Literature DB >> 25349549

Pharmacist perception and use of UpToDate®.

Katie L Wallace1, Robert D Beckett1, Amy Heck Sheehan1.   

Abstract

A cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of 1,199 pharmacists was conducted to describe pharmacists' use and perception of UpToDate®. Of 472 (39%) respondents, 217 (46%) reported using UpToDate. Most respondents who used or had heard of UpToDate indicated willingness to change a treatment plan based on UpToDate recommendations (77%). Many believed that UpToDate is updated weekly (31%) or monthly (49%) and that all articles undergo external peer review (51%). In conclusion, the majority of respondents reported that they would adjust drug therapy based on UpToDate recommendations; however, many pharmacists may hold misconceptions regarding the updating and peer-review processes.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25349549      PMCID: PMC4188058          DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.102.4.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc        ISSN: 1536-5050


  10 in total

1.  Speed, accuracy, and confidence in Google, Ovid, PubMed, and UpToDate: results of a randomised trial.

Authors:  Robert H Thiele; Nathan C Poiro; David C Scalzo; Edward C Nemergut
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.401

2.  An evaluation of five bedside information products using a user-centered, task-oriented approach.

Authors:  Rose Campbell; Joan Ash
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2006-10

3.  Evaluation of e-textbooks. DynaMed, MD Consult and UpToDate.

Authors:  Felicity Goodyear-Smith; Ngaire Kerse; Jim Warren; Bruce Arroll
Journal:  Aust Fam Physician       Date:  2008-10

4.  Evaluation of pharmacist use and perception of Wikipedia as a drug information resource.

Authors:  Laurie Brokowski; Amy Heck Sheehan
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  2009-10-20       Impact factor: 3.154

5.  The quality, breadth, and timeliness of content updating vary substantially for 10 online medical texts: an analytic survey.

Authors:  Jeanette C Prorok; Emma C Iserman; Nancy L Wilczynski; Robert B Haynes
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Survey of user preferences from a comparative trial of UpToDate and ClinicalKey.

Authors:  Michael R Kronenfeld; R Curtis Bay; William Coombs
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2013-04

7.  Should we Google it? Resource use by internal medicine residents for point-of-care clinical decision making.

Authors:  Alisa Duran-Nelson; Sophia Gladding; Jim Beattie; L James Nixon
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 6.893

8.  Use of UpToDate and outcomes in US hospitals.

Authors:  Thomas Isaac; Jie Zheng; Ashish Jha
Journal:  J Hosp Med       Date:  2011-11-16       Impact factor: 2.960

9.  To compare PubMed Clinical Queries and UpToDate in teaching information mastery to clinical residents: a crossover randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Ladan Sayyah Ensan; Masoomeh Faghankhani; Anna Javanbakht; Seyed-Foad Ahmadi; Hamid Reza Baradaran
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Speed of updating online evidence based point of care summaries: prospective cohort analysis.

Authors:  Rita Banzi; Michela Cinquini; Alessandro Liberati; Ivan Moschetti; Valentina Pecoraro; Ludovica Tagliabue; Lorenzo Moja
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-09-23
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.