It isn’t even close.
UptoDate is geared towards everyday clinical use, and I can obtain succinct, evidence-based answers in a fraction of the time when compared to PubMed.
Related posts:
- UpToDate = the Microsoft of medicine texts?
- Start of a backlash against UpToDate?
- "If one cannot practice medicine without UpToDate, maybe one should not practice at all"
- Do doctors already have a source of comparative effectiveness research?
- Who monitors clinical guidelines?
- Google vs PubMed
- PubMed and its search engine
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 4 comments }
I love UpToDate… it rocks!!
which one is more cost effective?
It depends on what you are looking for. I agree, if use have a clinical question related to a patient you are seeing, use uptodate. If on the otherhand you want to review the latest paper’s or research on a given subject, then use pubmed.
Yes, but…better for some things, not others. Also, IMHO it can appear take on an author’s predispositions on controversial subjects. In these cases, pull the source articles. I can vouch for the allergy/asthma sections, though, are excellent. But pricey if you want to have access outside an institution.
Comments on this entry are closed.