03-26-2010 03:36 PM
I would like to get everyone's opinion on using Wikipedia as a resource. I personally love it, but I have heard a lot of complaints lately on the part of others who mistrust the revision process that Wikipedia uses. Obviously, I wouldn't use Wikipedia as my sole source of information in which to make decisions, but that is because I wouldn't use just any single one source in which to make a decision in the first place.
03-27-2010 09:23 AM
When I'm doing research, I'll start with Google and Bing searches which often list Wikipedia pretty high in the results, at least for more general concepts. I do find Wikipedia a good resource as a launching point for more details, either by following the reference links or just by seeing additional terms that then I can use to refine my Google searching. I also find Wikipedia often has useful illustrations of concepts that I'll then use or model off to clarify a concept in a presentation.
As far as the reliability of the data, like GrahamOH, I wouldn't use it as my sole source...I'll take the "trust, but verify" approach.
03-29-2010 09:54 AM - edited 03-29-2010 04:56 PM
I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia for any type of drug information, or any medical information for that matter. It's a bad practice as the information is not verified. You can throw anything up there.
Now if you want to look up a quick history of the Palm OS or how fast a dog runs, then by all means use Wikipedia. But never use it as a pharmacy reference tool.
Just my two cents.
Here's a couple of articles worth looking at:
Ann Pharmacother 2008, 42(12) 1814-21
Ann Pharmacother 2009,43(11): 1912 - 1913