ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2021
UpToDate versus DynaMed: a cross-sectional study comparing the speed and accuracy of two point-of-care information tools.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Decision Support and Natural Language Processing in Medicine: Systematic Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Comparing the Use of DynaMed and UpToDate by Physician Trainees in Clinical Decision-Making: A Randomized Crossover Trial.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Trial
- Dosage adjustments in renal impairment among medical ward patients: ChatGPT® and DeepSeek® models' effectiveness in assessing those adjustments.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Adoption of an Electronic Decision Support Tool for Capacity Building of Community Health Workers: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Accuracy and Safety of ChatGPT-3.5 in Assessing Over-the-Counter Medication Use During Pregnancy: A Descriptive Comparative Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinician Attitudes and Perceptions of Point-of-Care Information Resources and Their Integration Into Electronic Health Records: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Usability and feasibility of a mobile application for real-time trauma care guidance: considerations for user adoption.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Article
- Straight to the point: evaluation of a Point of Care Information (POCI) resource in answering disease-related questions.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2024Article
- Performance of a Web-Based Reference Database With Natural Language Searching Capabilities: Usability Evaluation of DynaMed and Micromedex With Watson.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Race-based medicine in the point-of-care clinical resource UpToDate: A systematic content analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Decision-Making in the Pediatric Emergency Department-A Survey of Guidance Strategies among Residents.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Examination of Potential Industry Conflicts of Interest and Disclosures by Contributors to Online Medical Resource Databases.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Mobile app use by medical students and residents in the clinical setting: an exploratory study.The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the accuracy, time to answer, user confidence, and user satisfaction between UpToDate and DynaMed (formerly DynaMed Plus), which are two popular point-of-care information tools.
methodsA crossover study was conducted with medical residents in obstetrics and gynecology and family medicine at the University of Toronto in order to compare the speed and accuracy with which they retrieved answers to clinical questions using UpToDate and DynaMed. Experiments took place between February 2017 and December 2019. Following a short tutorial on how to use each tool and completion of a background survey, participants attempted to find answers to two clinical questions in each tool. Time to answer each question, the chosen answer, confidence score, and satisfaction score were recorded for each clinical question.
resultsA total of 57 residents took part in the experiment, including 32 from family medicine and 25 from obstetrics and gynecology. Accuracy in clinical answers was equal between UpToDate (average 1.35 out of 2) and DynaMed (average 1.36 out of 2). However, time to answer was 2.5 minutes faster in UpToDate compared to DynaMed. Participants were also more confident and satisfied with their answers in UpToDate compared to DynaMed.
conclusionsDespite a preference for UpToDate and a higher confidence in responses, the accuracy of clinical answers in UpToDate was equal to those in DynaMed. Previous exposure to UpToDate likely played a major role in participants' preferences. More research in this area is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.