2005 Physicians' Desk Reference with PDR Electronic Library on CD-Rom

Rating:
Summary: A better alternative
Review: I am a clinical psychologist and need some drug info.
The PDR is a perfect example of the difference between data and information and its publisher's high handedness is to be expected when it teams with M$.
I just bought and love the Mosby 2004 Drug Guide. Better paper, easier to read, more usable info, and only $30. It is not completely 2004 (none are really current) and the index to brand names has a few omissions but these are minor problems.

Rating:
Summary: Standard
Review: There are a lot of drug reference books. Many, if not most, are quite good. It depends more on how you like your information organized than anything else. The PDR is not designed to be carried in your pocket, it designed to be...well, exhaustive and filled with virtually all the data about the given drug. But regardless of what you think about the PDR, one thing is certain: The PDR has become a gold standard among practioners and is relied upon heavily by physicians.

Rating:
Summary: CD Terrible
Review: Without question the PDR is a mandatory reference guide for physicians. It does contain all the required prescription drug monographs mandated by the FDA and has a reasonably useful indexing system for searching by Name, Generic, or Disorder/Treatment. The pill identification section is far from comprehensive and considering the decades this has been in publication I would expect slightly more. The lack of a Macintosh installer with the different versions of the cd (you can get this from being in different medical associations, as a medical student, or personally) is ridiculous. Stedmans is included completely in the 'individual' install, it's just not accessable from the PDR interface. The expiration date is ludicrous. Why? Because you own the physical volume (I own 2 shelves of a bookcase of the physical volumes). I have often had to reference back 8 or 9 years to see what formats a current medication was available in as people seem to take it for granted that if they are still taking the same medication, it is available in the same dosage and format. Some serious mistakes can and have been made because this information isn't available in a comprehensive archival system. There is no legitimate argument for an electronic licensing agreement which prevents you from accessing the same documents (less in fact) that you have in hardcopy format. The DRM is probably the only reason this isn't completely mac/other/pda's compatible and it is completely negligent of the publisher to not produce a full non-expiring library. I hope that at some point in time the PDR electronic version is treated correctly and made available as HTML with a Java/javascript search system. This could easily have been done, but wasn't in the name of money and it's harmful to the healthcare system.