Information Sources Utilized by Private Practice and University Physicians

Abate, Marie A.; Jacknowitz, Arthur I.; Shumway, James M.

doi:10.1177/009286158902300220

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As in the case of research scientists, numerous studies have investigated the information‐related behavior of healthcare workers, doctors, and pharmacists (Bush, King, & Tenopir, 2004; Case, 2007; Stinson & Mueller, 1980). Several studies have examined this behavior as it relates to pharmaceutical information, most commonly for doctors and pharmacists in Western Europe and North America (e.g., Abate, Jacknowitz, & Shumway, 1989; Coumou & Meijman, 1994; Gaither, Bagozzi, Kirking, & Ascione, 1994; Gerrett & Clerk, 1997; “Internet influences doctors' clinical diagnosis,” 2002; Joy, Arana, & Gallo, 1986; Ko & Sklar, 2009; Koo & Miller, 1992; Liddell, 1990; Lundborg, Hensjo, & Gustafsson, 1998; Schrimsher, Freeman, & Kendrach, 2006; Simon, Soares, & Aranda da Silva, 1987). They tend to show a general reliance on a small number of sources for pharmaceutical information: standard reference texts and formularies, colleagues, and pharmaceutical company representatives, joined now by internet sources.…”

Section: Pharmaceutical Information Producers and Usersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmaceutical information: A 30‐year perspective on the literature

Bawden¹,

Robinson²

2011

Annual Review Info Sci & Tec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Pharmaceutical Information Producers and Usersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmaceutical information: A 30‐year perspective on the literature

Bawden¹,

Robinson²

2011

Annual Review Info Sci & Tec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…works with colleagues and reliance upon information provided by pharmaceutical sales representatives. Despite its limitations, the Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR), a compilation of pharmaceutical product package inserts, has been found to be the reference most commonly utilized by physicians to meet their information needs [8][9][10][11]. Researchers concerned about the resources used to access information have concluded that additional approaches are necessary to provide health-care providers with unbiased authoritative information pertaining to pharmaceutical products and drug therapies [12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These databases have been used with varying degrees of. success and consequently have not been~ widely accepted or adopted by health professionals [8][9][10][11][12][13]15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes of Community Pharmacists, University-Based Pharmacists, and Students Toward On-Line Information Resources

Shumway¹,

Jacknowitz²,

Abate³

1996

Methods Inf Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study sought to explore the attitudes of community pharmacists, university-based pharmacists, and pharmacy students before and after exposure to computerized systems of on-line information services. A 42-item attitudinal survey was administered to 21 community pharmacists, 7 university clinical pharmacist faculty, and 17 senior pharmacy students, prior to and at the end of a year of access to Grateful Med® and BRS Colleague®. Few significant differences were noted among the participants at baseline. No significant interaction-effect differences for type of participant or system used were found. Participants were generally positive about computers in general, the accuracy of on-line information services, their impact on knowledge and confidence, and their usefulness for pharmacists.

show abstract

“…Studies of physicians' use of PI predate these changes. [3][4][5][6] Because the PI is the basis for many sources of physician information, it is critical to understand how physicians process the revised PI. This study is designed to examine how physicians search for medical information [7][8][9] by assessing physicians' use of the PI and how it may affect physicians' perceptions of the drug.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary Care Physicians' Use of FDA-Approved Prescription Drug Labels

Sullivan

O’Donoghue

Aikin

2014

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In 2006, the US Food and Drug Administration reorganized the approved label format and content for prescription drugs -also known as the prescribing information (PI). This research examines primary care physicians' use of the new PI and how it may influence their perceptions about prescription drugs.Methods: A total of 500 physicians responded to an Internet survey that displayed an interactive PI for a fictitious combination pain relief/heart attack-reducing drug. The physicians answered questions about perceived risk, perceived benefit, and intention to prescribe that focused on either the treatment indication or the prevention indication.Results Keywords: Drug Labeling, Prescription DrugsEach successful prescription drug application to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) results in FDA-approved product labeling, known as prescribing information (PI). The PI details pertinent information about the drug, such as contraindications, and contains essential information for the practice of medicine. It accompanies the product, is available online-including on the FDA's website (http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/ index.cfm) and the Physician's Desk Reference website (http://www.pdr.net)-and forms the basis for information found in other physician platforms, such as Epocrates.Based on research and public input, the FDA reorganized the PI in 2006 to make it more user friendly.1,2 The PI for many products (and all new products' PI) now follow the new format. It includes a table of contents and a highlights section, which provides an overview of the PI. Studies of physicians' use of PI predate these changes.3-6 Because the PI is the basis for many sources of physician information, it is critical to understand how physicians process the revised PI. This study is designed to examine how physicians search for medical information 7-9 by assessing physicians' use of the PI and how it may affect physicians' perceptions of the drug. Methods ProcedureParticipants were recruited from an opt-in internet panel of more than 100,000 physician members of the American Medical Association. To be included, their primary area of specialization had to be family practice, general practice, or internal medicine and they had to report spending 50% or more of their time on direct patient care. We created a PI for a fictitious drug, Gilarix, indicated to reduce chronic pain (treatment indication) and the risk of heart attack (prevention indication). Participants viewed the PI twice: First, they were asked to attend to the PI to help the FDA improve its presentation (task 1). Second, they were asked to focus on the drug's efficacy (task 2). For both tasks, participants first saw the Contents page, with a hyperlink for the title of each section and subsection (eg, Contraindications). Within each section, participants could move back to the previous section, move forward to the next section, or go to the Contents or Highlights pages to choose another section to view. After viewing the PI for as long as they l...

show abstract

Information Sources Utilized by Private Practice and University Physicians

Cited by 9 publications

References 17 publications

Pharmaceutical information: A 30‐year perspective on the literature

Pharmaceutical information: A 30‐year perspective on the literature

Attitudes of Community Pharmacists, University-Based Pharmacists, and Students Toward On-Line Information Resources

Primary Care Physicians' Use of FDA-Approved Prescription Drug Labels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About