Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Design and evaluation of a software for the objective and easy-to-read presentation of new drug properties to physicians

Authors: Maia Iordatii, Alain Venot, Catherine Duclos

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

When new pharmaceutical products appear on the market, physicians need to know whether they are likely to be useful in their practices. Physicians currently obtain most of their information about the market release and properties of new drugs from pharmaceutical industry representatives. However, the official information contained in the summary of product characteristics (SPCs) and evaluation reports from health agencies, provide a more complete view of the potential value of new drugs, although they can be long and difficult to read. The main objective of this work was to design a prototype computer program to facilitate the objective appraisal of the potential value of a new pharmaceutical product by physicians. This prototype is based on the modeling of pharmaceutical innovations described in a previous paper.

Methods

The interface was designed to allow physicians to develop a rapid understanding of the value of a new drug for their practices. We selected five new pharmaceutical products, to illustrate the function of this prototype. We considered only the texts supplied by national or international drug agencies at the time of market release. The perceived usability of the prototype was evaluated qualitatively, except for the System Usability Scale (SUS) score evaluation, by 10 physicians differing in age and medical background.

Results

The display is based on the various axes of the conceptual model of pharmaceutical innovations. The user can select three levels of detail when consulting this information (highly synthetic, synthetic and detailed). Tables provide a comparison of the properties of the new pharmaceutical product with those of existing drugs, if available for the same indication, in terms of efficacy, safety and ease of use.
The interface was highly appreciated by evaluators, who found it easy to understand and suggested no other additions of important, internationally valid information. The mean System Usability Scale score for the 10 physicians was 82, corresponding to a “good” user interface.

Conclusions

This work led us to propose the selection, grouping, and mode of presentation for various types of knowledge on pharmaceutical innovations in a way that was appreciated by evaluators. It provides physicians with readily accessible objective information about new drugs.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
McGettigan P, Golden J, Fryer J, Chan R, Feely J. Prescribers prefer people: The sources of information used by doctors for prescribing suggest that the medium is more important than the message. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;51(2):184–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Høye S, Straand J, Brekke M. How do general practitioners keep up-to-date on pharmacotherapy. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2008;128(23):2692–5.PubMed
3.
Spurling GK, Mansfield PR, Montgomery BD, Lexchin J, Doust J, Othman N, et al. Information from pharmaceutical companies and the quality, quantity, and cost of physicians’ prescribing: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2010;7(10):e1000352.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Lexchin J. What information do physicians receive from pharmaceutical representatives? Can Fam Physician. 1997;43:941–5.PubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Mintzes B, Lexchin J, Sutherland JM, Beaulieu MD, Wilkes MS, Durrieu G, et al. Pharmaceutical sales representatives and patient safety: a comparative prospective study of information quality in Canada, France and the United States. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(10):1368–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Muijrers PE, Grol RP, Sijbrandij J, Janknegt R, Knottnerus JA. Differences in prescribing between GPs. Impact of the cooperation with pharmacists and impact of visits from pharmaceutical industry representatives. Fam Pract. 2005;22(6):624–30.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Lamy JB, Duclos C, Bar-Hen A, Ouvrard P, Venot A. An iconic language for the graphical representation of medical concepts. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008;8:16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Lamy JB, Venot A, Bar-Hen A, Ouvrard P, Duclos C. Design of a graphical and interactive interface for facilitating access to drug contraindications, cautions for use, interactions and adverse effects. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008;8:21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Patapovas A, Dormann H, Sedlmayr B, Kirchner M, Sonst A, Müller F, et al. Medication safety and knowledge-based functions: a stepwise approach against information overload. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;76(1):14–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Welch HG. Using a drug facts box to communicate drug benefits and harms: two randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:516–27.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. The Drug Facts Box: Improving the communication of prescription drug information. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(3):14069–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
13.
14.
Baldonado MQW, Woodruff A, Kuchinsky A. Guidelines for using multiple views in information visualization. Proceedings of Advanced Visual Interfaces Conference (AVI 2000); 2000 May 23-26; Palermo, Italy. NY: ACM; 2000; 110-119.
15.
16.
Borsci S, Federici S, Lauriola M. On the dimensionality of the System Usability Scale: a test of alternative measurement models. Cogn Process. 2009;10(3):193–7.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Chittaro L. Information visualization and its application to medicine. Artif Intell Med. 2001;22(2):81–8.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Saadé RG, Otrakji CA. First impressions last a lifetime: effect of interface type on disorientation and cognitive load. Comput Hum Behav. 2007;23:525–35.CrossRef
19.
Staggers N, Kobus D. Comparing response time, errors, and satisfaction between text-based and graphical user interfaces during nursing order tasks. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7(2):164–76.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Edwards R, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. The Lancet. 2000;356:1255–9.CrossRef
21.
Duke JD, Li X, Grannis SJ. Data visualization speeds review of potential adverse drug events in patients on multiple medications. J Biomed Inform. 2010;43(2):326–31.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Design and evaluation of a software for the objective and easy-to-read presentation of new drug properties to physicians
Authors
Maia Iordatii
Alain Venot
Catherine Duclos
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0158-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Physicians’ responses to computerized drug interaction alerts with password overrides

Research article

Improving performance in medical practices through the extended use of electronic medical record systems: a survey of Canadian family physicians

Research article

Electronic medical record-based multicondition models to predict the risk of 30 day readmission or death among adult medicine patients: validation and comparison to existing models

Research article

Latitude-based approach for detecting aberrations of hand, foot, and mouth disease epidemics

Software

SEND: a system for electronic notification and documentation of vital sign observations

Research article

A scoping review of cloud computing in healthcare