Rating: 
Summary: DORLAND'S IS THE DON-----COLOUR PLEASE!
Review: Greek, Latin, and so on and so forth! If the issue concerns your understanding of all those strange, jaw-breaking medical terms; weep no more! Dorland's is your friend in need.
The 29th edition of this Illustrated Medical Dictionary is at the moment, (among) the best on clinical definitions. The only blemish though, is that anatomy and histology diehards would frown at the many black and white figures that have persisted for a hundred years!
Yes, there is need for colourful illustrations, but that does not take away much from the lexicon.
The CD-ROM version is particularly cute. It offers extreme flexibility to the user, without compromising any of the extra features that make e-books more attractive.
Rating:
Summary: Clear and concise
Review: I am a new student to medical transcription and terminology. Dorland's book is by far the best dictionary for a beginner, or a long time user. The print is nice and large, preventing eye strain and bold headings make searches much easier.
Rating: 
Summary: ALL THE INFORMATION I NEED
Review: I found Dorland's Medical Dictionary to be an excellent reference source. I have been in the medical field for twenty-five years and always reach for Dorland's now when I have a question regarding a definition of any medical term. Excellent reference material!
Rating:
Summary: Far superior to the rest
Review: I have been a medical transcriber for years and Dorland's far surpasses any other dictionary I have used. The layout is that of a common dictionary, which we're all accustomed to using, and it is easy to find the word you're looking for. Compare Stedman's: the layout is confusing in that there are are often many subcategories to one word, and I often cannot find a word I'm looking for, only to find it another day under some heading where I never dreamed it would be. When reading Dorland's, it is clear that the dictionary is geared to the medical professional, with its concise, scientific definitions and detailed illustrations. It is expensive, but well worth it.
Rating:
Summary: Far superior to the rest
Review: I have been a medical transcriber for years and Dorland's far surpasses any other dictionary I have used. The layout is that of a common dictionary, which we're all accustomed to using, and it is easy to find the word you're looking for. Compare Stedman's: the layout is confusing in that there are are often many subcategories to one word, and I often cannot find a word I'm looking for, only to find it another day under some heading where I never dreamed it would be. When reading Dorland's, it is clear that the dictionary is geared to the medical professional, with its concise, scientific definitions and detailed illustrations. It is expensive, but well worth it.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Medical Dictionary
Review: I have used the Dorland's Medical Dictionary for 25 years working in a hospital transcription position. This dictionary makes looking up words easy and in most cases I could find what I was looking for in here when I could not find it in the Stedman's. I am buying books for working at home and this is one of my first choices.
Rating: 
Summary: This was very disappointing
Review: I was very disappointed when I got this dictionary. I had before the 1937 17th edition and the 1982 pocket edition. This edition shows you what cann happen when a book goes through many editions. Among the things wrong were: 1) The book is oversized and bulky to handle. 2) It is printed on what may be positiveley the worst sort of paper for a medical dictionary or other alphabetically rganized reference book. The pages are a bit hard to separate and are very easily badly wrinkled by water. I worried about whether Amazon com would let me return it after I damaged one page but they said okay. I have very rarely seen any book printed on paper like it or close to it except for some Bibles. 3) It is an important principle of a good medical dictionary that evry word used in a definition should itself be defined (although that will send a novice looking through half a dozen or more entries, the person will learn and it's valueable) This principle I think has been forgotten and this may nmot apply to new words added in recent editions - or the word may be defined only by pointing back to the entry that mentioned it. 4) The definitions have gotten too wordy. This is probably an attemppt to make them more exact but this is done by throwing in extra clauses into the middle of a definitio. 5) The illustrations are all in black and white, even for the eye, in spite f the fact that the 1982 Pocket edition had several color plates. 6) There is a lot f extra white space on the pages. To me this just looks like a reduction in quality. This is not more user friendly. User frinedly would be ease in speed of looking something up and understanding. The dictionary as a whole almost seems l like the target audience the publisher now has in mind is an experienced physician who may once every month or three look up ONE word. That is not for whom a dictionary should be designed for. rather it should be a student or educated layperson. I'm keeping on using my old dictionaries. For anything new I can probably find glossaries in a book. There may not be now any good medical dictionary on the market or if there is it is probably pbscure. Overall also I should say paperbacks or Permabond type covers are better than hardcover. Not only do they weight more, but I think the dust jacket of a hardcover is more easily damaged than the cover of a paperback.
Rating:
Summary: Top review
Review: I'm a CMT and I use this work all the time
Rating:
Summary: The 30th edition of Dorland's is a real delight.
Review: I'm not in a position to criticize anyone who prefers Mosby's or Stedman's dictionaries; however I have used all three and found the 30th ed. of Dorland's to be my personal favorite.1. Anyone who uses books regularly knows the importance of a dictionary's binding and printing. Dorland's has a beautiful layout, easy-to-read font, and subtle and effective illustrations. The paper is top quality, and few books these days are so well bound. The book stays open at any page and when shut feels like a brick. The binding doesn't flex and the pages don't sag. 2. I am not a specialist, but I haven't found any word from a medical textbook that wasn't easy to locate and very well defined. The quality of the illustrations is really striking--particularly for anatomical terms. I find an excess of pictures and photographs distracting in a dictionary, and Dorland's are always well-chosen and relevant. 3. The CD-ROM/registration code is a nice plus. I can't comment on the PDA feature, but the access to the internet version of Dorland's is an incredible time saver if one happens to be working at the computer. I love this dictionary. If I had time I'd read it cover to cover. The only downside is the size. There's definitely a place for Taber's or some other compact dictionary for travel, etc. P.S.-- Thanks to Ken Saladin for his excellent critical review. The editors at Dorland's must have been listening too, since the 30th edition has all the terms he listed as missing (and hopefully others as well!)
Rating:
Summary: The 30th edition of Dorland's is a real delight.
Review: I'm not in a position to criticize anyone who prefers Mosby's or Stedman's dictionaries; however I have used all three and found the 30th ed. of Dorland's to be my personal favorite. 1. Anyone who uses books regularly knows the importance of a dictionary's binding and printing. Dorland's has a beautiful layout, easy-to-read font, and subtle and effective illustrations. The paper is top quality, and few books these days are so well bound. The book stays open at any page and when shut feels like a brick. The binding doesn't flex and the pages don't sag. 2. I am not a specialist, but I haven't found any word from a medical textbook that wasn't easy to locate and very well defined. The quality of the illustrations is really striking--particularly for anatomical terms. I find an excess of pictures and photographs distracting in a dictionary, and Dorland's are always well-chosen and relevant. 3. The CD-ROM/registration code is a nice plus. I can't comment on the PDA feature, but the access to the internet version of Dorland's is an incredible time saver if one happens to be working at the computer. I love this dictionary. If I had time I'd read it cover to cover. The only downside is the size. There's definitely a place for Taber's or some other compact dictionary for travel, etc. P.S.-- Thanks to Ken Saladin for his excellent critical review. The editors at Dorland's must have been listening too, since the 30th edition has all the terms he listed as missing (and hopefully others as well!)
| 
