Archive for November 2011
An independent review of sources to retrieve medial applications.
iMedicalApps <http://www.imedicalapps.com> is an excellent source for reviews of medical apps by medical professionals. The site can be filtered by platform (Android, Blackberry, iPad, iPhone), medical specialty, or app “type” (calculators, drug reference, textbooks, etc.). Postings include reviews of individual apps, comparisons of similar apps, and “top 10” type lists by topic, as well as news stories about the mobile industry in medicine. Reviews are written by a team of physicians and medical students. The reviews generally include screenshots and describe the app in context with others in that category. Strengths and weaknesses are highlighted, and individual user pricing is provided. A really simply syndication (RSS) feed is available. The reviews and categories are aimed at medical professionals looking for apps to use on their own devices.
PCWorld writers review apps for Apple and Android on PCWorld’s AppGuide <http://www.pcworld.com/appguide/>, alongside user-contributed reviews. It is easy to spot the PCWorld-written reviews versus user-contributed reviews. A few of the health app reviews were written by invited health professionals, but most are not. Reviews focus on functionality, interface, and ease of use rather than quality of evidence.
The quality of drug information in Wikipedia continues to be inconsistent, increasing the risk that consumers and practitioners may inappropriately rely on it.
Natalie Kupferberg, MLS, MA, AHIP. Accuracy and completeness of drug information in Wikipedia: an assessment. J Med Libr Assoc. 2011 October; 99(4): 310–313.
The investigation of Web 2.0 applications in medical-related organisations is of critical importance. Recent trends have indicated the increasing use of Web 2.0 tools in the health sector as shown through a large number of studies.To date, most of the research on Web 2.0 in health has focused on the individual level, e.g. how individuals such as physicians, medical students and patients use Web 2.0. However, research on the institutional/organisation level, more specifically, how medical-related organisations use Web 2.0 is meagre.
Therefore, this study attempts to give an overview of the trends and issues associated with medical-related organisations’ (University Medical Libraries,Public Hospitals and Non-profit Medical Organisations) adoption or non-adoption of Web 2.0 technologies.
Results showed that knowledge and information sharing and the provision of a better communication platform were rated as the main purposes of using Web 2.0. Time constraints and low staff engagement were the most highly rated difficulties. In addition, most participants found Web 2.0 to be beneficial to their organisations. Medical-related organisations that adopted Web 2.0 technologies have found them useful, with benefits outweighing the difficulties in the long run.
Samuel KaiWa h Chu, Matsuko Woo, Ronnel B. King, Stephen Choi, Miffy Cheng, Peggy Koo. Examining the application of Web 2.0 in medical-related organisations. Health Information & Libraries Journal. Article first published online: 17 NOV 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2011.00970.x
“People who invest in pharma companies have to expect, not as a permanent condition, but as a long term trend, a lower rate of return than they had during the golden blockbuster years…”
Armstrong, Drew. Drugmakers’ Returns on Research Fall as Pipeline Projects Fail. Bloomberg.com, online, posted on Nov. 21, 2011.
Riahinia, N., Zandian, F., Azimi, A.Web citation persistence over time: A retrospective study. Electronic Library, Volume 29, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 609-620.