The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Physicians' Desk Reference: Problems and Possible Improvements
Abstract
The Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR) is a widely used source of drug information by American physicians and patients, but as we shall discuss, it suffers from numerous shortcomings. The PDR is a collection of written and pictorial information that is provided and paid for by pharmaceutical manufacturers. The written material for a given drug is a compilation of data and recommendations that are identical to those in the drug's package insert. The wording and directives that are included in these package inserts (and thus in the PDR) represent information that the pharmaceutical companies are permitted to present following discussion and approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Rockville, Md. The PDR is thus a negotiated effort of commercial enterprises and governmental regulators.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mechanism of the Cardiotoxic Actions of Terfenadine
Woosley, R. L. (1993) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500120070028 · Cited by 646
Cited by
Timing of new black box warnings and withdrawals for prescription medications
Lasser, K. E. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.17.2215 · Cited by 1,005
Riluzole augmentation in treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder: An open-label trial
Coric, V., Taskiran, S., Pittenger, C., Wasylink, S., Mathalon, D. H., Valentine, G., Saksa, J., Wu, Y.-T., Gueorguieva, R., Sanacora, G., et al. (2005) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.043 · Cited by 314
Mastering variation: Variance components and personalised medicine
Senn, S. (2016) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6739 · Cited by 205
The beta-1 adrenergic antagonist, betaxolol, improves working memory performance in rats and monkeys
Ramos, B. P., Colgan, L., Nou, E., Ovadia, S., Wilson, S. R., & Arnsten, A. F. T. (2005) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.05.022 · Cited by 147
Brown, A. C. (2017) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2016.07.001 · Cited by 77
Metadata
- Authors
- Cohen, J. S.
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1996-07-08
- Volume
- 156
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 1375
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2122050315
- Cited by
- 428
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 36.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Physicians' Desk Reference: Problems and Possible Improvements. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archinte.1996.00440120021003
- The paper
- Cohen, J. S. (1996). The Physicians' Desk Reference: Problems and Possible Improvements. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1996.00440120021003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
