A Systematic Evaluation of Evidence Based Medicine Tools for Point-of-Care
Julie M. Trumble, Margaret J. Anderson, Marlene Caldwell, Felicia Chuang, Stephanie Fulton, Anne Howard, Beatriz Varman
This University of Texas study, referenced by both BMJ Clinical Evidence and Stat!Ref (host of ACP PIER), was presented at the South Central Chapter/MLA meeting in October 2006. The study compared thirteen point-of-care tools in such areas as scope, depth of information, usability, frequency updated, grading of evidence, and presentation of results. ACP PIER and BMJ Clinical Evidence were rated first and second, respectively. The investigators conclude that evaluating products is a subjective process, that standard measures clarify the distinctions between products, and that an institution’s needs are an important part of the equation.
In addition to the slides, the investigators have made their Excel spreadsheets available so that users may re-sort the information as they wish.
- PowerPoint slide presentation only (not zipped)
- Zipped files — PowerPoint, handouts, spreadsheets, blank evaluation forms