This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Joe V. Jones, MD
Blytheville, Ark

Arch Intern Med. 1997;157(5):576.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Two concerns came to mind as I read "The Physicians' Desk Reference [PDR]: Problems and Possible Improvements" by Cohen and Insel.¹ The PDR² must be viewed as a form of advertising (in a reference format) in which pharmaceutical manufacturers present information on medications that they pick and choose by presenting package insert information approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

As Cohen and Insel aptly noted, the information presented is reviewed and approved by the FDA. The PDR should not be viewed as anything more than a collection of advertising in a reference format. I have always found the PDR to be invaluable when I need to identify a medication or review the FDA-approved prescribing information. I would not want to see an effort made to allow the pharmaceutical companies to provide additional information of their own choosing in a compilation such as the PDR unless the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?