Evaluation of drug reviews

Area of Science:

• Pharmacology
• Medical Informatics
• Scientific Publishing

Background:

• Drug reviews are crucial for disseminating information on new medications.
• Evaluating the quality and scope of drug reviews across journals is essential for healthcare professionals.
• The period 1982-1984 saw significant developments in drug therapy and review publications.

Purpose of the Study:

• To quantitatively assess and compare drug review articles published in four key journals.
• To analyze duplication, timeliness, scope, and format of reviews.
• To guide healthcare professionals in selecting appropriate drug review resources.

Main Methods:

• Quantitative analysis of drug reviews from Clinical Pharmacy, Drug Intelligence and Clinical Pharmacy (DICP), Drugs, and Pharmacotherapy (1982-1984).
• Comparison of review content, including sections, bibliography, and use of tables/figures.
• Evaluation of review scope, detail, accessibility, and reviewer expertise.

Main Results:

• Pharmacotherapy published the most reviews (49), followed by Drugs (43), Clinical Pharmacy (37), and DICP (29).
• Drugs and Pharmacotherapy featured the most unique drug reviews; Pharmacotherapy and Clinical Pharmacy led in reviews of new drugs.
• Reviews in Drugs were the most comprehensive, with extensive references, tables, and detail, offering high information accessibility.

Conclusions:

• Journal selection for drug reviews should align with user needs regarding timeliness, scope, and format.
• Drugs provides the most detailed and comprehensive drug reviews, while Pharmacotherapy excels in volume and new drug coverage.
• Continuing education credits are available for review articles in Clinical Pharmacy and DICP, adding value for some users.