Use of References in Responses from Scandinavian Drug Information Centres

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare use of references in responses from Scandinavian drug information centres (DICs). Methods: Six different fictitious drug-related queries were sent to each of seven Scandinavian DICs. The six queries concerned adverse effects, pharmacokinetics, pregnancy, complementary medicine, polypharmacy, and breast feeding. References in the responses were categorised into five types of drug information sources: primary (original studies), secondary (reviews), tertiary (drug monographs, handbooks, etc.), DIC database, or personal communication. Results: Two hundred and forty-four references were used in the 42 responses. The mean number of references varied from 3.0 to 10.6 for the six queries. The largest difference between centres with regard to number of references used (range 1–17) was found for the query on complementary medicine. In total, 124 references (50.8%) were tertiary, and only 10 of the 42 responses (23.8%) did not have any tertiary references included. Complementary medicine, breast feeding, and pregnancy were query types associated with relatively frequent use of primary references. Use of DIC database was not uncommon, but personal communications were seldom used. Conclusions: Scandinavian DICs differ substantially in number and type of references to identical drug-related queries. Tertiary sources are mainly preferred irrespective of type of query.

Drug information centres and their provision of decision support: The Scandinavian experience

“…We studied the use of references in the answers from 2013 and compared it to the results from a 1993 study in a Scandinavian DIC s etting. 19 In agreement with previous findings, 3 tertiary literature s ources seem to be useful for most types of questions. Original a rticles were especially useful in questions concerning drug use in | 491 COMMENTARY pregnancy and breast-feeding.…”

“…

n ot imply that the more time one spends processing a question, t he poorer the answer. 19 In agreement with previous findings, 3 tertiary literature s ources seem to be useful for most types of questions. The answers with the lowe st quality were quite easy to identify, whereas high-quality answers were more difficult to point out, as the differences between scores of individual responses were small.

…”

“…19 In agreement with previous findings, 3 tertiary literature s ources seem to be useful for most types of questions. 19 In agreement with previous findings, 3 tertiary literature s ources seem to be useful for most types of questions.…”

Pattern of Drug Information Sources Utilized by Medical Practitioners at A Teaching Hospital in Nepal

“…A study done by Schjott et al 14 also reported that the studied DICs utilized tertiary reference to answer drug queries in 124 (50.8%) instances. 14 Behera et al 3 reported that websites were commonly used references for answering drug query received by them. As our study centre is a medical college with undergraduate (MBBS) and postgraduate (MD / MS) programs, easy accessibility to textbooks and preference of faculties for answers from textbooks could have led to higher utilization of textbooks for DI.…”

“…The study from Scandinavia also reported that only one type of source of information is not sufficient. 14 Gitanjali et al reported that drug advertisements published in Indian and British editions of the British Medical Journal also contained inadequate scientific information. 19 Tertiary sources of DI like the European summaries of product characteristics were also reported to be deficient by several studies as information related to prescribing medicines in special situations was inadequate.…”