Evaluation of adverse drug reaction formatting in drug information mobile phone applications.


Journal

Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA
ISSN: 1558-9439
Titre abrégé: J Med Libr Assoc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101132728

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Jan 2022
Historique:
entrez: 25 2 2022
pubmed: 26 2 2022
medline: 1 3 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To evaluate the differences in presentation (formatting) of adverse drug reaction (ADR) information within drug monographs in commonly used drug information (DI) mobile device applications. A cross-sectional analysis of ADR formatting of twenty commonly prescribed oral medications within seven DI mobile applications was performed. Databases were assessed for ADR information, including presence of placebo comparisons, severity of ADR, onset of ADR, formatting of ADRs in percentile (quantitative) format or qualitative format, whether references were used to cite information, and whether ADRs are grouped by organ system. Data was collected by two study investigators and discrepancies were resolved via consensus. The seven DI mobile applications varied significantly on every analyzed ADR variable with the exception of ADR onset, which was absent in all databases. Significant differences were found for variables known to impact clinical judgment such as placebo comparisons and qualitative versus quantitative formatting. Placebo comparisons were most common among monographs in Lexicomp (30%) but were absent among monographs within other applications. Quantitative information was commonly used in most databases but was absent in Epocrates. Qualitative formatting was present in all Epocrates and Micromedex applications but absent in the majority of other applications. Substantial variations were also found in severity and grouping information. Substantial variation in ADR formatting exists among the most common DI mobile applications. These differences may translate into alternative interpretations of medical information and thus impact clinical judgment. Health care librarians and clinicians should consider ADR formatting when choosing between DI applications.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35210966
doi: 10.5195/jmla.2022.1251
pii: jmla.2022.1251
pmc: PMC8830402
doi:

Substances chimiques

Pharmaceutical Preparations 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

81-86

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Sean M. McConachie, Dena Berri, Jewel Konja, Christopher A. Giuliano.

Références

Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981 Aug;30(2):239-45
pubmed: 7249508
J Med Libr Assoc. 2020 Jan;108(1):76-83
pubmed: 31897054
J Med Syst. 2012 Oct;36(5):3135-9
pubmed: 22052129
J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Dec;26(12):1411-7
pubmed: 21792695
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007 Mar 08;7:7
pubmed: 17346336
Psychol Health Med. 2013;18(6):645-53
pubmed: 23387993
J Med Libr Assoc. 2020 Oct 1;108(4):598-604
pubmed: 33013217
Int J Clin Pharm. 2018 Aug;40(4):903-910
pubmed: 30051231
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012 Nov;21(11):1139-54
pubmed: 22761169
Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):696-713
pubmed: 17873259
Pharm World Sci. 2002 Apr;24(2):46-54
pubmed: 12061133
Med Decis Making. 2011 May-Jun;31(3):432-6
pubmed: 21191122
BMJ. 2004 Jul 3;329(7456):47-50
pubmed: 15231628
Med Decis Making. 2015 Nov;35(8):937-47
pubmed: 25952743
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2005 May;61(3):169-73
pubmed: 15827761
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012 Jul 10;12:67
pubmed: 22781312
Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2018 Feb;17(2):125-137
pubmed: 29258401
Ann Behav Med. 2014 Dec;48(3):311-22
pubmed: 24682975
Am J Pharm Educ. 2015 Mar 25;79(2):22
pubmed: 25861103
Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2018 Jul;17(7):681-695
pubmed: 29952667
Psychol Rep. 2015 Oct;117(2):508-22
pubmed: 26444837
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Oct;64(4):482-8
pubmed: 17711539
MMWR Suppl. 2013 Nov 22;62(3):161-3
pubmed: 24264508
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012 Oct 30;12:121
pubmed: 23110712
Med Decis Making. 1985 Winter;5(4):453-63
pubmed: 3842425
Ann Pharmacother. 2013 Jul-Aug;47(7-8):1088-95
pubmed: 23821609
J Eval Clin Pract. 2001 May;7(2):97-107
pubmed: 11489035

Auteurs

Sean M McConachie (SM)

et6398@wayne.edu, Eugene Applebaum College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Wayne State University and Beaumont Hospital, Dearborn, Detroit, MI.

Dena Berri (D)

dena.berri@wayne.edu, PharmD Candidate, Eugene Applebaum College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.

Jewel Konja (J)

iewel.konia@wayne.edu, PharmD Candidate, Eugene Applebaum College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.

Christopher A Giuliano (CA)

ek2397@wayne.edu, Eugene Applebaum College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Wayne State University and Ascension St. John Hospital, Detroit, MI.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH