Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Implementing a Process to Review Product-Specific Misinformation in Online Drug Information Compendia

  • Regulatory Science
  • Published:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Health care professionals and consumers often use online drug information compendia, which are intended to be user-friendly, readily available, accurate, and up-to-date. While these resources can be valuable, it has been shown that some compendia contain inaccuracies and outdated information, motivating the Medical Services (medical information) Department at Purdue Pharma LP to implement a periodic, standardized review of select online drug information compendia. Monographs within compendia for up to 9 Purdue products were reviewed and compared to their current Full Prescribing Information, with a focus on identifying safety-related misinformation. Content correction requests for nearly 1000 errors were submitted to 7 compendia clinical editors. This surprisingly large number of errors highlights the need for compendia to better maintain accurate product monographs, as well as for pharmaceutical companies to proactively and periodically review them for misinformation. Based on these findings, an overview on how the pharmaceutical industry may implement a drug information compendia review process is provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Decision Resources Group. Rx research on smartphones and tablets surges as desktop/laptop searches decline. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/rx-research-on-smartphones-and-tablets-surges-as-desktoplaptop-searches-decline-242260721.html. Published January 2014. Accessed July 2014.

  2. 148Apps.biz. Apple iTunes store metrics, statistics and numbers for iPhone apps. http://148apps.biz/app-store-metrics/?mpage=catcount. Accessed July 2014.

  3. AppBrain. Top categories on Google Play. http://www.appbrain.com/stats/android-market-app-categories. Accessed July 2014.

  4. Law MR, Mintzes B, Morgan SG. The sources and popularity of online drug information: an analysis of top search engine results and web page views. Ann Pharmacother. 2011;45 (3):350–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lum C, Ahn SM. The correction of product information in drug references and medical textbooks. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2012;46 (1):94–98.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Aungst TD. Medical applications for pharmacists using mobile devices. Ann Pharmacother. 2013;47 (7–8):1088–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fox S, Duggan M. Health online 2013. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media//Files/Reports/PIP_HealthOnline.pdf. Accessed July 2014.

  8. Manhattan Research. Taking the pulse pharmacists 2012: pharmacist market trends. http://depts.washington.edu/prehlth/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/ManhattanResearch-Taking-the-Pulse-Pharmacists.pdf. Accessed July 2014.

  9. Manhattan Research. New study finds pharmacists play an increasingly active role in patient care and show strong demand for digital patient support resources from pharma [press release]. http://manhattanresearch.com/News-and-Events/Press-Releases/pharmacists-patient-care. Published November 2012. Accessed July 2014.

  10. Alvarez A. How are physicians using smartphones for professional purposes? http://www.kantarmedia-healthcare.com/how-are-physicians-using-smartphones-for-professional-purposes. Published April 22, 2013. Accessed September 2014.

  11. Cohen JS. Dose discrepancies between the Physician’s Desk Reference and the medical literature, and their possible role in the high incidence of dose-related adverse drug events. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161 (7):957–964.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Clauson KA, Polen HH, Boulos MN, Dzenowagis JH. Scope, completeness, and accuracy of drug information in Wikipedia. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42 (12):1814–1821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Vaughan KT, Scolaro KL, Anksorus HN, Roederer MW. An evaluation of pharmacogenomic information provided by five common drug information resources. J Med Lib Assoc. 2014;102 (1):47–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lapoint J, Perrone J, Nelson LS. Electronic pharmacopoeia: a missed opportunity for safe opioid prescribing information? J Med Toxicol. 2014;10 (1):15–18.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. 42 CFR 414.930(a). Compendium defined. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title42-vol3/pdf/CFR-2011-title42-vol3-sec414-930.pdf. Accessed July 2014.

  16. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry—Internet/social media platforms: correcting independent third-party misinformation about prescription drugs and medical devices [draft]. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM401079.pdf. Published June 2014. Accessed July 2014.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Services, Purdue Pharma LP, Stamford, CT, USA

    Sonia R. Talwar PharmD, Nancy T. Crudele PharmD, Erica H. Dankiewicz PharmD & Amarita S. Randhawa PharmD

  2. Health Policy, Purdue Pharma LP, Stamford, CT, USA

    J. David Haddox DDS, MD

Authors
  1. Sonia R. Talwar PharmD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nancy T. Crudele PharmD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erica H. Dankiewicz PharmD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amarita S. Randhawa PharmD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. David Haddox DDS, MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonia R. Talwar PharmD.

Additional information

Author Note

This study was presented at the DIA Medical and Scientific Communications 2014 Annual Forum; Drug Information Compendia “Evaluating Drug Monograph Content, Impact on Patient Care and Understanding Transparency”; March 11, 2014; Orlando, Florida, USA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Talwar, S.R., Crudele, N.T., Dankiewicz, E.H. et al. Implementing a Process to Review Product-Specific Misinformation in Online Drug Information Compendia. Ther Innov Regul Sci 49, 262–268 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479014558274

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479014558274

Keywords

Search

Navigation