From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removed promotional-sounding statement[edit]

I have removed the following passage as a bit of dubious marketing-speak, poorly supported by the references provided.

More than 30 research surveys worldwide have shown that use of UpToDate may improve patient care and quality.[1][2][3][4]

  1. ^ Campbell R, Ash J (October 2006). "An evaluation of five bedside information products using a user-centered, task-oriented approach". J Med Libr Assoc. 94 (4): 435–41, e206–7. PMC 1629448Freely accessible. PMID 17082836. 
  2. ^ Ely JW, Osheroff JA, Chambliss ML, Ebell MH, Rosenbaum ME (2005). "Answering physicians' clinical questions: obstacles and potential solutions". J Am Med Inform Assoc. 12 (2): 217–24. doi:10.1197/jamia.M1608. PMC 551553Freely accessible. PMID 15561792. 
  3. ^ Leff B, Harper GM (May 2006). "The reading habits of medicine clerks at one medical school: frequency, usefulness, and difficulties". Acad Med. 81 (5): 489–94. doi:10.1097/01.ACM.0000222273.90705.a6. PMID 16639211. 
  4. ^ Lai CJ, Aagaard E, Brandenburg S, Nadkarni M, Wei HG, Baron R (May 2006). "Brief report: Multiprogram evaluation of reading habits of primary care internal medicine residents on ambulatory rotations". J Gen Intern Med. 21 (5): 486–9. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00432.x. PMC 1484781Freely accessible. PMID 16704393. 

The "may improve patient care and quality" is a bit of marketing waffle. (If there was conclusive, robust evidence there wouldn't be a "may"; as it stands, the sentence is equally true – and equally useless – if one writes "may not improve patient care".) Obviously, there are four citations offered, not "more than 30"; in any case, this is the sort of claim best supported by a proper secondary source or meta-analyses, not by piling up as many little primary papers as the marketing department can find. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:09, 4 May 2014 (UTC)