Robert D Beckett, Yashawna Brattain, Judy Truong, Genevieve Engle
{"title":"新冠肺炎治疗和预防的三级药物信息来源。","authors":"Robert D Beckett, Yashawna Brattain, Judy Truong, Genevieve Engle","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate tertiary drug information databases in terms of scope, consistency of content, and completeness of COVID-19 drug information.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five electronic drug information databases: Clinical Pharmacology, Lexi-Drugs, AHFS DI (American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information), eFacts and Comparisons, and Micromedex In-Depth Answers, were evaluated in this cross-sectional evaluation study, with data gathered from October 2021 through February 2022. Two study investigators independently extracted data (parallel extraction) from each resource. Descriptive statistics were primarily used to evaluate scope (i.e., whether the resource addresses use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) and completeness of content (i.e., whether full information is provided related to the use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) based on a 10-point scale. To analyze consistency among resources for scope, the Fleiss multi-rater kappa was used. To analyze consistency among resources for type of recommendation (i.e., in favor, insufficient evidence, against), a two-way mixed effects intraclass coefficient was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 46 drug monographs, including 3 vaccination monographs, were evaluated. Use of the agents for treatment of COVID-19 was most frequently addressed in Lexi-Drugs (73.9%), followed by eFacts and Comparisons (71.7%), and Micromedex (54.3%). The highest overall median completeness score was held by AHFS DI followed by Micromedex, and Clinical Pharmacology. There was moderate consistency in terms of scope (kappa 0.490, 95% CI 0.399-0.581, p<0.001) and recommendations (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.518, 95% CI 0.385-0.651, p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Scope and completeness results varied by resource, with moderate consistency of content among resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"783-791"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621729/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tertiary drug information sources for treatment and prevention of COVID-19.\",\"authors\":\"Robert D Beckett, Yashawna Brattain, Judy Truong, Genevieve Engle\",\"doi\":\"10.5195/jmla.2023.1662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate tertiary drug information databases in terms of scope, consistency of content, and completeness of COVID-19 drug information.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five electronic drug information databases: Clinical Pharmacology, Lexi-Drugs, AHFS DI (American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information), eFacts and Comparisons, and Micromedex In-Depth Answers, were evaluated in this cross-sectional evaluation study, with data gathered from October 2021 through February 2022. Two study investigators independently extracted data (parallel extraction) from each resource. Descriptive statistics were primarily used to evaluate scope (i.e., whether the resource addresses use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) and completeness of content (i.e., whether full information is provided related to the use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) based on a 10-point scale. To analyze consistency among resources for scope, the Fleiss multi-rater kappa was used. To analyze consistency among resources for type of recommendation (i.e., in favor, insufficient evidence, against), a two-way mixed effects intraclass coefficient was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 46 drug monographs, including 3 vaccination monographs, were evaluated. Use of the agents for treatment of COVID-19 was most frequently addressed in Lexi-Drugs (73.9%), followed by eFacts and Comparisons (71.7%), and Micromedex (54.3%). The highest overall median completeness score was held by AHFS DI followed by Micromedex, and Clinical Pharmacology. There was moderate consistency in terms of scope (kappa 0.490, 95% CI 0.399-0.581, p<0.001) and recommendations (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.518, 95% CI 0.385-0.651, p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Scope and completeness results varied by resource, with moderate consistency of content among resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"volume\":\"111 4\",\"pages\":\"783-791\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621729/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1662\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1662","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:从新冠肺炎药品信息的范围、内容的一致性和完整性等方面评价三级药品信息数据库。方法:在这项横断面评估研究中,使用2021年10月至2022年2月收集的数据,评估了五个电子药物信息数据库:临床药理学、Lexi Drugs、AHFS DI(美国医院处方服务药物信息)、eFacts and Comparisons和Micromedex In Depth Answers。两名研究研究人员从每个资源中独立提取数据(并行提取)。描述性统计主要用于基于10分制评估范围(即资源是否涉及新冠肺炎治疗或预防药物的使用)和内容的完整性(即是否提供了与新冠肺炎治疗或预防用药相关的完整信息)。为了分析范围资源之间的一致性,使用了Fleiss多评分kappa。为了分析推荐类型(即赞成、证据不足、反对)的资源一致性,计算了双向混合效应组内系数。结果:共评价46部药物专著,其中疫苗接种专著3部。Lexi-Drugs(73.9%)、eFacts and Comparisons(71.7%)和Micromedex(54.3%)中最常见的药物用于治疗新冠肺炎。总体完整性中位数得分最高的是AHFS DI,其次是Micromedex和Clinical Pharmacology。在范围方面存在中度一致性(kappa 0.490,95%CI 0.399-0.581,P结论:范围和完整性结果因资源而异,资源之间的内容具有中度一致性。
Tertiary drug information sources for treatment and prevention of COVID-19.
Objective: To evaluate tertiary drug information databases in terms of scope, consistency of content, and completeness of COVID-19 drug information.
Methods: Five electronic drug information databases: Clinical Pharmacology, Lexi-Drugs, AHFS DI (American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information), eFacts and Comparisons, and Micromedex In-Depth Answers, were evaluated in this cross-sectional evaluation study, with data gathered from October 2021 through February 2022. Two study investigators independently extracted data (parallel extraction) from each resource. Descriptive statistics were primarily used to evaluate scope (i.e., whether the resource addresses use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) and completeness of content (i.e., whether full information is provided related to the use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) based on a 10-point scale. To analyze consistency among resources for scope, the Fleiss multi-rater kappa was used. To analyze consistency among resources for type of recommendation (i.e., in favor, insufficient evidence, against), a two-way mixed effects intraclass coefficient was calculated.
Results: A total of 46 drug monographs, including 3 vaccination monographs, were evaluated. Use of the agents for treatment of COVID-19 was most frequently addressed in Lexi-Drugs (73.9%), followed by eFacts and Comparisons (71.7%), and Micromedex (54.3%). The highest overall median completeness score was held by AHFS DI followed by Micromedex, and Clinical Pharmacology. There was moderate consistency in terms of scope (kappa 0.490, 95% CI 0.399-0.581, p<0.001) and recommendations (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.518, 95% CI 0.385-0.651, p<0.001).
Conclusion: Scope and completeness results varied by resource, with moderate consistency of content among resources.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) is an international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly that aims to advance the practice and research knowledgebase of health sciences librarianship. The most current impact factor for the JMLA (from the 2007 edition of Journal Citation Reports) is 1.392.