Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Peer Review”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources
PubMed2002

Randomised clinical trial on the effect of the Dutch obstetric peer review system.

The project "Obstetric Peer Review Interventions" (Verloskundige Onderlinge Kwaliteitsspiegeling Interventies, VOKSINT) was set-up in The Netherlands in 1994. It provided annual comparison data (quality ranking, league tables) for secondary care obstetric departments adjusted for population differences, based on the data registered in the Perinatal Database of The Netherlands (Landelijke Verloskunde Registratie, LVR). The aim of the so-called VOKS reports was to influence obstetricians' interventions in such a way that they led to a more homogeneous policy. To assess this influence, a trial was set-up, with departments randomly assigned to be or not to be informed about the VOKS results. Obstetric intervention rates and the morbidity of newborns including neonatal neurological examinations (NNEs) were assessed. Obstetric intervention rates were similar in the report group and the control group. Practice in the report group became more homogeneous (adjusted for population differences) than in the control departments, but this was only statistically significant for term caesarean section.

Cesarean Section↗
PubMedDate not supplied

New peer review law provides immunity with obligations.

In the expectation that vigorous peer review will reduce incidents of medical malpractice nationwide, a new federal law, the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-660), provides immunity from most lawsuits for those who sponsor and participate in physician peer review activities. However, this immunity does not extend automatically to all peer review activities. Those who wish to qualify for immunity must comply with the new law's obligations.

Licensure, Medical↗
PubMed1979

Attitides towards peer review.

The Australian Commonwealth Minister for Health called on the Australian Medical standards in Australia. Among the initial responses of the AMA was the organization of a National Seminar of Peer Review. Participants were asked to identify questions they would like to have answered about peer review and about aspects of a peer review system which they would perceive as necessary for its acceptability. Responses to these questions are analyzed and discussed. Implications for the introduction of peer review in Australia are examined, and strategies for gaining the commitment of the profession to the implementation of peer review are suggested.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2006

Fate of abstracts presented at the World Congress of Endourology: are they followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals?

PURPOSE: To estimate the acceptance rate of peer-reviewed journals, to describe the time course of subsequent full publication, and to identify those with characteristics associated with publication of the abstracts presented at the World Congress of Endourology (WCE). METHODS: All abstracts accepted for presentation at the 2001 and 2002 WCE meetings were identified from the published supplements to the Journal of Endourology. The subsequent publication rate for the corresponding studies was evaluated by scanning MEDLINE for the 5-year period after the meetings. RESULTS: Overall, 20.5% of the abstracts were followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals. Abstracts on transurethral, laparoscopic, and percutaneous procedures had the highest publication rates (25.5%, 25%, and 24.3%, respectively). Studies from North America had the highest publication rate (29.2%). The mean time to publication was 14.6 months. There was an 80% chance that an eventually published abstract was in print 2 years after presentation. The largest number of the reports were published in the Journal of Endourology (75 of 234; 32%), the official publication of the society that sponsors the WCE. CONCLUSIONS: Only one fifth of the abstracts presented at the WCE are ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals. Attendees should be aware of this limitation, and scientific committees should be encouraged to be more selective. Although presentation at major urological congresses constitutes an invaluable method for rapid scientific dissemination, abstracts contain data that usually are difficult to access and of questionable validity. In this respect, investigators are encouraged to publish their data.

Bibliometrics↗
PubMed1990

Data bank has operational impact. Proper peer review can protect hospitals from antitrust and defamation suits.

The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 can help protect medical professionals and healthcare facilities from antitrust and defamation claims and other forms of litigation arising from the peer review process. Some hospitals may need to make major changes in their peer review activity as a result of the act. The healthcare entity, not the physicians involved in peer review, has the burden of complying with the provisions of the act. Failure to comply with the act can lead to loss of immunity from damages, fines, and potential exclusion from the Medicare program. The potential for liability has sparked a need for hospitals to reexamine and possibly reorganize medical staff and update procedures and related governing documents. Healthcare entities may consider changes such as implementing a director of medical affairs function, choosing medical staff for multiple-year terms, and centralizing physician review files. In the 1980s many hospitals created quality assurance and risk management programs. Risk managers need to share data with quality assurance personnel, who must in turn share the information with medical staff involved with credentialing, peer review, and medical affairs management. Legal counsel will need to be familiar with the legalities of the act, as well as the hospital's peer review procedures and operations. General legal counsel should oversee coordination of hospital proceedings and assist in educating staff on the legalities of peer review.

Credentialing↗
PubMed1990

Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.

Although the beginnings of "peer review" are frequently associated with the Royal Society of London when it took over official responsibility for the Philosophical Transactions in 1752, antecedents of peer review practices go back to the 17th century. Despite the differences in the academic, social, intellectual, and economic environments of the 18th century and today, we can find interesting and instructive similarities in the way early editors defined and exercised their prerogatives and responsibilities. These concerns extend to ideas and practices that are closely related to what we call peer review or refereeing today.

History, 18th Century↗
PubMed1999

Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers' recommendations: a randomised trial.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effect on peer review of asking reviewers to have their identity revealed to the authors of the paper. DESIGN: Randomised trial. Consecutive eligible papers were sent to two reviewers who were randomised to have their identity revealed to the authors or to remain anonymous. Editors and authors were blind to the intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The quality of the reviews was independently rated by two editors and the corresponding author using a validated instrument. Additional outcomes were the time taken to complete the review and the recommendation regarding publication. A questionnaire survey was undertaken of the authors of a cohort of manuscripts submitted for publication to find out their views on open peer review. RESULTS: Two editors' assessments were obtained for 113 out of 125 manuscripts, and the corresponding author's assessment was obtained for 105. Reviewers randomised to be asked to be identified were 12% (95% confidence interval 0.2% to 24%) more likely to decline to review than reviewers randomised to remain anonymous (35% v 23%). There was no significant difference in quality (scored on a scale of 1 to 5) between anonymous reviewers (3.06 (SD 0.72)) and identified reviewers (3.09 (0.68)) (P=0.68, 95% confidence interval for difference - 0.19 to 0.12), and no significant difference in the recommendation regarding publication or time taken to review the paper. The editors' quality score for reviews (3.05 (SD 0.70)) was significantly higher than that of authors (2.90 (0.87)) (P<0.005, 95%confidence interval for difference - 0.26 to - 0.03). Most authors were in favour of open peer review. CONCLUSIONS: Asking reviewers to consent to being identified to the author had no important effect on the quality of the review, the recommendation regarding publication, or the time taken to review, but it significantly increased the likelihood of reviewers declining to review.

Decision Making↗
PubMed2006

Variations in the ability of general medical practitioners to apply two methods of clinical audit: A five-year study of assessment by peer review.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical audit has a central role in the NHS clinical governance agenda and the professional appraisal of medical practitioners in the UK. However, concerns have been raised about the poor design and impact of clinical audit studies and the ability of practitioners to apply audit methods. One method of making informed judgements on audit performance is by peer review. In the west of Scotland a voluntary peer review model has been open to general practitioners since 1999, while general practice trainees are compelled to participate as part of summative assessment. The study aimed to compare the outcomes of peer review for two methods of audit undertaken by different professional and academic groups of doctors. METHODS: Participants submitted a criterion audit or significant event analysis in standard formats for review by two informed general practitioners (GPs) using appropriate instruments. Peer review outcome data and the professional status of doctors participating were generated by computer search. Differences in proportions of those gaining a satisfactory peer review for each group were calculated. RESULTS: Of 1002 criterion audit submissions, 552 (55%) were judged to be satisfactory. GP registrars were significantly more likely than GP trainers (P < 0.001) and other established GP groups (P < 0.001) to gain a satisfactory peer review. GPs in non-training practices were less likely to achieve a satisfactory review than registrars (P < 0.001) and colleagues in training practices (P < 0.001). Of 883 SEA submissions, 541 (65%) were judged as satisfactory, with all groups gaining a similar proportion of satisfactory assessments, although GP registrars may have outperformed non-training practice GPs (P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of GPs may be unable to adequately apply audit methods, potentially raising serious questions about the effectiveness of clinical audit as a health care improvement policy in general medical practice.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2002

Summary of the National Toxicology Program's report of the endocrine disruptors low-dose peer review.

At the request of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), the National Toxicology Program organized an independent and open peer review to evaluate the scientific evidence on low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose-response relationships for endocrine-disrupting chemicals in mammalian species. For this peer review, "low-dose effects" referred to biologic changes that occur in the range of human exposures or at doses lower than those typically used in the standard testing paradigm of the U.S. EPA for evaluating reproductive and developmental toxicity. The demonstration that an effect is adverse was not required because in many cases the long-term health consequences of altered endocrine function during development have not been fully characterized. A unique aspect of this peer review was the willing submission of individual animal data by principal investigators of primary research groups active in this field and the independent statistical reanalyses of selected parameters prior to the peer review meeting by a subpanel of statisticians. The expert peer-review panel (the panel) also considered mechanistic data that might influence the plausibility of low-dose effects and identified study design issues or other biologic factors that might account for differences in reported outcomes among studies. The panel found that low-dose effects, as defined for this review, have been demonstrated in laboratory animals exposed to certain endocrine-active agents. In some cases where low-dose effects have been reported, the findings have not been replicated. The shape of the dose-response curves for reported effects varied with the end point and dosing regimen and were low-dose linear, threshold-appearing, or nonmonotonic. The findings of the panel indicate that the current testing paradigm used for assessments of reproductive and developmental toxicity should be revisited to see whether changes are needed regarding dose selection, animal-model selection, age when animals are evaluated, and the end points being measured following exposure to endocrine-active agents.

Androgens↗
PubMed1991

The relationship of hospital characteristics and the results of peer review in six large states.

To determine which characteristics of hospitals may be related to a higher quality of care, the association of hospital characteristics with the outcomes of medical record review by state Peer Review Organizations (PROs) was studied. The two data sources were: 1) the AHA 1986 Annual Survey of Hospitals and 2) reviews completed between July 1987 through June 1988 from six large PROs. For each hospital the percentage of cases that failed physician review (the confirmed problem rate) was computed. Hospital characteristics evaluated included financial status, ownership, medical training, technological sophistication, and size. The following characteristics were significantly associated with a lower confirmed problem rate: a higher occupancy rate, greater payroll expenses per bed, a higher proportion of physicians who were board-certified specialists, greater technological sophistication, a higher number of beds, a higher proportion of nurses who were registered, and membership in the Council of Teaching Hospitals. Public hospitals had higher problems rates than private not-for-profit hospitals. All characteristics significantly related to higher confirmed problem rates were also related to higher adjusted mortality rates in a previous study of 3,100 U.S. hospitals. The results suggest that hospital resources, including financial status, training of medical personnel, and availability of sophisticated equipment, are related to the quality of care provided by the hospital.

Bed Occupancy↗
PubMed1997

Peer review and continuous quality improvement of pharmacists' clinical interventions.

A peer-review-based continuous quality improvement (CQI) program for improving pharmacists' clinical interventions at a hospital is described. With the implementation of pharmaceutical care at Detroit Receiving Hospital came the need for a CQI system to validate and improve this type of patient care. A peer-review group (PRG) was formed. The PRG decided to review 60 pharmacist interventions per month for clinical appropriateness, accuracy of entry into the computer, documentation in the medical record by the pharmacist, and implementation if accepted by the physician. Interventions are assigned to individual reviewers, and final decisions on the appropriateness and correctness of the selected interventions are made at periodic PRG meetings. In its first year the PRG met nine times and evaluated 409 interventions; 96% of the interventions were judged clinically appropriate, 62% were accurately entered into the computer, 62% were documented in the medical record by the pharmacist, and 92% were implemented if accepted by the physician. Meetings, additional reviews, and inservice sessions were used to address deficiencies in the interventions; these efforts led to improvements. The clinical appropriateness of documented interventions was included as a medication use indicator in the hospital CQI program. A peer-review-based CQI process allowed a hospital to effectively monitor and improve the quality and documentation of interventions recommended by pharmacists.

Hospital Bed Capacity, 300 to 499↗
PubMed2005

Guide for peer reviewers of scientific articles in the Croatian Medical Journal.

Despite its shortcomings, peer review is still the best tool of scientific publishing. It brings benefits not only to the journal and its authors, but to the peer reviewers: they are privileged to have an insight into the latest research and still unpublished results in their scientific field. Reviewers also build up their ability to critically assess scientific papers, which may be useful in their own professional work and development. We wrote these brief guidelines to help the reviewers for the Croatian Medical Journal learn about the specificities of the journal and editor's expectations from their partnership with peer reviewers. The guidelines were created primarily for new reviewers, but they may be useful as a refresher text for experienced reviewers.

Documentation↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The effect of peer review on professionalism, autonomy, and accountability.

In this article, the authors describe the relevance and impact of peer review on professional nursing practice. The healthcare, business, education, and social science literature are reviewed. Although the benefits of peer review often are assumed to contribute to increased professionalism, autonomy, and accountability, there is little formal research evidence to support these assumptions. Regardless, empirical data show potential for increased professionalism, improved performance, and valuable feedback provided to nursing personnel. In addition, the authors explore the potential of peer review in developing and maintaining professional accountability among practicing staff nurses.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Peer review. A strategy to enhance cooperative student learning.

Peer review is an activity that encourages self-regulation in nursing practice. A learning activity was designed and implemented in an Australian nursing program to encourage student familiarity and proficiency in peer review. The experience of implementing this innovative learning and assessment strategy is discussed.

Cooperative Behavior↗
PubMed2005

A systematic review of how homeopathy is represented in conventional and CAM peer reviewed journals.

BACKGROUND: Growing popularity of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the public sector is reflected in the scientific community by an increased number of research articles assessing its therapeutic effects. Some suggest that publication biases occur in mainstream medicine, and may also occur in CAM. Homeopathy is one of the most widespread and most controversial forms of CAM. The purpose of this study was to compare the representation of homeopathic clinical trials published in traditional science and CAM journals. METHODS: Literature searches were performed using Medline (PubMed), AMED and Embase computer databases. Search terms included "homeo-pathy, -path, and -pathic" and "clinical" and "trial". All articles published in English over the past 10 years were included. Our search yielded 251 articles overall, of which 46 systematically examined the efficacy of homeopathic treatment. We categorized the overall results of each paper as having either "positive" or "negative" outcomes depending upon the reported effects of homeopathy. We also examined and compared 15 meta-analyses and review articles on homeopathy to ensure our collection of clinical trials was reasonably comprehensive. These articles were found by inserting the term "review" instead of "clinical" and "trial". RESULTS: Forty-six peer-reviewed articles published in a total of 23 different journals were compared (26 in CAM journals and 20 in conventional journals). Of those in conventional journals, 69% reported negative findings compared to only 30% in CAM journals. Very few articles were found to be presented in a "negative" tone, and most were presented using "neutral" or unbiased language. CONCLUSION: A considerable difference exists between the number of clinical trials showing positive results published in CAM journals compared with traditional journals. We found only 30% of those articles published in CAM journals presented negative findings, whereas over twice that amount were published in traditional journals. These results suggest a publication bias against homeopathy exists in mainstream journals. Conversely, the same type of publication bias does not appear to exist between review and meta-analysis articles published in the two types of journals.

Bias↗
PubMed2005

Clinical peer review: description of a comprehensive model in behavioral healthcare.

This article describes a comprehensive model of clinical peer review that was established at a large behavioral healthcare organization serving children, adolescents, and adults with developmental disabilities. The purpose of peer review is to provide routine evaluation of practice standards that will produce the highest quality of habilitative care. The major components of peer review address (a) clinical support and administration, (b) intervention policies and procedures, (c) case consultation, (d) utilization of extraordinary procedures, (e) performance improvement projects, and (f) communication at all levels of the organization. This article discusses implementation of the model, including examples and illustrations, and factors that contribute to positive outcome. This approach to peer review represents a systems methodology that can be adopted by behavioral healthcare and human service organizations to build an in-house program of clinical quality improvement. It is a necessary first step in the large-scale implementation of behavioral services.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Peer review of teaching in Web-based courses in nursing.

With the explosion of college-level Web-based courses, concern has arisen about the quality of online courses. Peer review of online courses is one method of ensuring that these courses meet the highest standards. Although numerous colleges and universities use peer review for classroom presentations, clinical experiences, and course materials, peer review of an online course may require a different type of expertise. This article describes the process for conducting a peer review of teaching in Web-based courses and explains how documentation of peer review of an online course can be used for faculty development, promotion and tenure decisions, curriculum decisions, and program review.

Computer-Assisted Instruction↗
PubMed1989

State access to peer review records: a clash of public policy.

Hospital peer review is a process that promotes important public objectives, yet is frequently under attack by persons pursuing private interests. An additional threat to this process has arisen from an unlikely source: state hospital licensing authorities. In this article, the authors discuss the conflict between state laws requiring access to peer review records and the need for confidentiality of such records.

Confidentiality↗