This site is very clean, with black text on a white background. Graphics are limited to PharmInfoNet logos. The site can likely be used on a variety of different platforms and browsers because it uses simple HTML code. Unlike most resources I would consider databases, no search function is provided. Rather, it consists of two indexes, by trade name and by generic name. Navigation is by first letter of the name only, although the lists are not long and the browser find feature works fine.
The information from the Web site itself indicates that it is intended to be a selective rather than comprehensive database. New drugs are added as they are reviewed. This has two useful results: new drugs are likely to be covered, and drugs are likely to be covered in greater detail. Each drug listed has at least five basic elements: generic name, trade name, manufacturer, treatment class, and indications. Each drug listed also has at least one link to additional information. Controversial drugs such as Viagra can have a large number of links to additional information. The additional information generally consists of a news or review article. Sometimes other information is linked as well. For example, the entry for Viagra (Sildenafil citrate) contains a link to a PDF version of the revised package insert. No indication is given when links lead to a non‐HTML document, such as a PDF file.
PharmInfoNet publishes several of the publications to which the database links. However, a number of publications by independent publishers are included as well. Articles from these independent publishers are selected “teaser articles”. These selected articles are stored on the PharmInfoNet Web site as well as on the publisher’s site. Some partners appear to be grant supported or are producers of federal publications, while others are for‐profit publishers. Both the disclaimer on the PharmInfoNet home page and the disclaimers for the independent publications indicate both a necessary caution and the fact that this is intended to be a consumer information site. The variety of sources can indicate variations in the quality of the information. The variety of sources can also result in repeated information.
I found reading several articles from different sources to be a good way to get a good overview of the current information on a topic. The articles were generally easy to read. Most of the articles include references. Using the set of articles for Viagra as an example, I found that, in contrast to the rumors that were spreading around the time the drug was first available, the articles provided were detailed, unbiased, and accurate.
In contrast to the standard drug sources DrugDB is more of a selected index to consumer literature. I find it to be closer to the Infotrac Health and Wellness product than to something like the Physician’s Desk Reference. There are many drug information sources on the Web. Some, like the database at Healthgate, provide search capabilities and a great deal of basic information: for example, dosage, side‐effects, and interactions with other substances.
Although it lacks some features such as a search engine, and the articles do not have links to the appropriate point in the database, DrugDB often provides a nice selection of articles on a given drug. However, I find it somewhat troublesome that the only sources for articles are the database’s publisher and three other publishers who post sample articles. I would recommend this site only to libraries with a strong interest in consumer health. Others will find the same information using a combination of citation databases and a standard source such as the Physician’s Desk Reference.
