Research Article

Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 30, Issue 6, pp 898-906

First online:

The DARTS tool for assessing online medicines information

  • Ulla NärhiAffiliated withEuropean Commission, Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry Email author 
  • , Marika Pohjanoksa-MäntyläAffiliated withDivision of Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki
  • , Anna KarjalainenAffiliated withNational Agency for Medicines
  • , Johanna K. SaariAffiliated withDivision of Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki
  • , Hannes WahlroosAffiliated withNational Agency for Medicines
  • , Marja S. AiraksinenAffiliated withDivision of Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki
  • , Simon J. BellAffiliated withDivision of Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access


Objective The use of the Internet as a source of medicines information is increasing. However, the quality of online information is highly variable. Equipping Internet users to distinguish good quality information is the aim of a new five-item quality assessment tool (DARTS) that was developed by the Working Group on Information to Patients under the Pharmaceutical Forum established by the European Commission. The objective of this study was to investigate how people with depression assess the quality of online medicines information and to study their opinions about the DARTS tool in assisting in this process. Setting Focus group discussions with Internet users were conducted in metropolitan Helsinki, Finland. Method Six focus group discussions (67–109 min duration) were conducted with people with depression (n = 29). The DARTS tool was used as a stimulus after open discussion in relation to the evaluation of the quality of Internet-based medicines information. The focus groups were digitally audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were thematically content analysed by two researchers. Results Focus group participants were generally critical of the information they retrieved. However, few participants systematically applied quality assessment criteria when retrieving online information. No participants had knowledge or experience of any quality assessment tools. The DARTS tool was perceived as being concise and easy to use and understand. Many participants indicated it would allay some of their concerns related to information quality and act as a reminder. While several participants felt the tool should not be any more extensive, some of them believed it should include a more in-depth explanation to accompany each of the quality criteria. Conclusions The DARTS tool may act as a prompt for people with depression to assess the quality of online information they obtain. The five DARTS criteria may form the basis of a systematic approach to quality assessment and the tool may also act as a reminder of quality issues in general. Further studies are needed to assess the actual value of the DARTS tool as well as its value in relation to other quality assessment instruments.


DARTS-tool Drug information Finland Patient information Patient participation Qualitative evaluation