J Med Libr Assoc. 2020 Oct 1;108(4):584-590. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2020.969.
The study evaluated point-of-care resources for scope, completeness, and consistency of information describing interactions between therapeutic drugs and drugs of abuse (DoA).
A cross-sectional evaluation study was conducted focusing on seven resources: Clinical Pharmacology, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers, Lexicomp Online, Micromedex, and A sample of clinically relevant interactions was developed through review of tertiary literature and resources, and input was solicited from subject matter experts. Entries from each resource for each interaction were evaluated for scope (i.e., whether there was an entry for the interaction); completeness (i.e., whether there was information addressing mechanism; clinical effects, severity, course of action, and level of certainty, described as a median rating on a 5-point scale); and consistency (i.e., whether the information in the resource was similar to the majority) among resources with an entry.
Following review by subject matter experts, the final sample contained 159 interactions. Scope scores ranged from 0.6% () to 43.4% (Lexicomp Online). Completeness scores ranged from 2 (interquartile range [IQR] 0 to 3, ) to 5 (IQR 5 to 5, Micromedex, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers). Consistency scores ranged from 30.8% () to 87.1% (Clinical Pharmacology) for severity and from 15.4% (Facts & Comparisons eAnswers) to 71.4% () for course of action.
Although coverage of drug-DoA interactions was low and content was often inconsistent among resources, the provided information was generally complete.
本研究评估了即时资源在描述治疗药物与药物滥用(DoA)之间相互作用时的范围、完整性和一致性。
本研究采用横断面评估方法,重点关注七种资源:临床药理学、事实与比较电子答案、Lexicomp Online、Micromedex、和。通过对三级文献和资源的回顾,以及向主题专家征求意见,开发了一组与临床相关的相互作用样本。对每种资源中每种相互作用的条目进行评估,以确定范围(即是否有相互作用的条目);完整性(即是否有信息涉及机制;临床效果、严重程度、行动过程和确定性,并以 5 分制的中位数评分来描述);以及在有条目记录的资源之间的一致性(即资源中的信息是否与多数资源相似)。
经过主题专家审查,最终样本包含 159 种相互作用。范围评分范围从 0.6%(Lexicomp Online)到 43.4%(Lexicomp Online)。完整性评分范围从 2(四分位距 [IQR] 0 到 3,)到 5(Micromedex、事实与比较电子答案)。一致性评分范围从严重程度的 30.8%(Clinical Pharmacology)到 87.1%(Clinical Pharmacology),从行动过程的 15.4%(事实与比较电子答案)到 71.4%()。
尽管药物与药物滥用相互作用的覆盖范围较低,且资源之间的内容往往不一致,但提供的信息通常较为完整。