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 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

Effect of resident peer review on charting behavior.

Traditionally the medical profession and, more recently, federal agencies have promoted peer review to improve quality of health care, although its effectiveness is uncertain. To assess ability of peer review to increase recording of comprehensive care, the resident charting of growth, immunizations, and family, past medical, developmental, and birth history was monitored in randomly selected charts six months before (747 charts) and six months after institution of peer review (691 charts). Faculty emphasis for charting remained uniform throughout the study. During ten 1-hour sessions, pediatric residents reviewed the charts of their colleagues for comprehensive care and other measurements using a standard form. Although faculty were not present, residents reported by post-study interview that vigorous discussion and peer pressure occurred during the sessions, and subjectively they felt their charting had improved. An objective assessment indicated charting of past medical history worsened after peer review was initiated, and charting of family history improved slightly. All changes were marginal. Charting was not related to the volume of patients seen by individual residents or their level of training but was relatively consistent for individual residents over successive rotations.

Documentation↗

[Peer review: a closed system in need of reform].

Peer review is the process by which experts assess the quality of manuscripts submitted for publication in scientific journals. During the last decade, this system for quality control has been debated a lot and investigated scientifically. By now, there is a widespread consciousness among scientists regarding the deficiencies of this system for quality control. It is slow, expensive, subjective, prone to bias and easily abused. To comply with its important function, the peer review system has to be reformed. The most important reforms would be to make it an open process--that is, the removal of the anonymity of the reviewing experts, and to oblige all parties in the publication process, authors, editors, reviewers, to declare potential conflicts of interest.

Conflict of Interest↗

A peer review program for professional nurses.

Within the past 3 years, the Division of Nursing in a large medical center implemented a career ladder and a professional practice model. Peer review was identified as a critical component for the success of these two initiatives and maturation of the model. Limitations in the conduct of peer review among the professional nursing staff centered around the lack of a coherent process. The Coordinating Council, the governing body of the professional nursing staff, formally recognized the accomplishments of a Quality Improvement team and directed the team to implement and evaluate a process of peer review. The development and implementation of peer review as experienced by this Quality Improvement team is described in this article. The process and structure of peer review and specific continuous improvement tools used by the team in developing this process are reviewed.

Career Mobility↗

The use of double anonymity in peer review: a decision whose time has come?

The process of peer review for submissions to scientific journals is a well-established and widely used procedure. However, there may still be room for improvement in the procedural aspects of peer review. Advantages and disadvantages of the current system, against the introduction of systems using either no anonymity, or double anonymity, are assessed. Recommendations to improve the robustness and fairness of the peer review process are proffered for the reader's consideration.

Journal Article↗

Peer review of psychodynamic psychotherapy. Experimental studies of the American Psychological Association/CHAMPUS program.

Two factorial experiments examined the effects of reviewer theoretical orientation, documented treatment progress, and patient concurrence data on the peer review of clinical treatment reports that described long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy with a depressed, female outpatient. The experiments employed an unobtrusive methodology; peer reviewers believed that their evaluations would affect the disposition of actual mental health insurance claims. Subjects (n = 105) were American Psychological Association/Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) peer reviewers of a psychodynamic, behavioral, or eclectic theoretical orientation. The psychodynamic reviewers, compared with the behavioral and eclectic reviewers, were more positive in their ratings of treatment and more generous in their future care reimbursement recommendations. Additionally, the data demonstrated that APA/CHAMPUS peer review was sensitive to reported treatment progress, and that reviewers of diverse orientations were equally responsive to documented progress in psychodynamic psychotherapy. The patient concurrence manipulation had little effect on the dependent measures. Implications for mental health quality assurance programs are discussed.

Health Benefit Plans, Employee↗

An exploration of the quality of peer review group activities within Australasia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a two-phase study of the structure of Australasian psychiatrist peer review groups. METHOD (Phase one): Initially, information was sought from chairs/coordinators of psychiatrist peer review groups regarding the nature and organisation of their group. RESULTS (Phase one): One hundred and three questionnaires were returned describing a number of models of peer review. Three principal models were identified: a teaching hospital model, a private practice model, and a private institution model. METHOD (Phase two): The second-phase questionnaire sought information on the quality of the review, using six proposed standards developed by the Quality Assurance Committee of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. RESULTS (Phase two): Many groups indicated that four of the proposed standards (those relating to documentation, having clear goals, reviewing actual clinical cases, and rigorous protection of confidentiality) were either already being followed or would be relatively easy to implement. The remaining two proposed standards (including structure, process and outcome dimensions of health care in the case discussion, and the use of explicit criteria) presented more difficulty. CONCLUSION: The application of such standards to peer review group meetings should assist groups to provide a forum for presentation and evaluation of clinical work where participants know they will be challenged in an environment which is both supportive and educational.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

Peer review amongst restorative specialists on the quality of their communication with referring dental practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: A peer review study was carried out to assess the written communication between consultants and specialist registrars in restorative dentistry with the referring general dental practitioners. METHODS: Seven people took part in the study and each presented referral and reply letters for five patients whom they had seen for consultation. The referral letters were used for information only and were not used in the peer review process. Each participant inspected the referral and reply letters from the other six participants. The reply letters were anonymously peer reviewed by using a proforma containing agreed criteria in relation to appropriate factors to include in the reply letter. The reviewer also ranked the letter in relation to overall quality on a 1-10 point scale. RESULTS: It was found that the participants' letters generally conformed positively with the agreed criteria although there were some differences between individuals. There were particular problems identified in relation to tooth notation. Reply letters commonly used different forms of tooth notation to the referring practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The ranking of the letters generally indicated that the participants' replies were judged to be favourable by their peers. There may be scope for continuing this study in relation to peer review by other groups of professionals, in particular practitioners in primary dental care.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

Quality assurance implications of federal peer review laws. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act and the National Practitioner Data Bank.

Patrick v. Burget, the landmark peer review case holding physicians liable under federal antitrust law for substantial damages caused by bad faith peer review, gave rise to the Health Care Quality Improvement Act. As shown in the recent decision in Austin v. McNamara, the Act's conditional immunities may promote peer review. However, the Act also created the National Practitioner Data Bank, which may have a chilling effect on peer review. The quality assurance implications of each of these federal legal developments is analyzed.

Antitrust Laws↗

Prospective peer review in fine needle aspiration cytology. Another step toward quality assurance.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of a prospective peer review program on diagnostic accuracy in a routine cytopathology laboratory. STUDY DESIGN: For the study, 4,836 consecutive cases subjected to fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) over a one-year period were used. Nine pathologists performed both reporting and peer review functions. Disagreements were classified into "diagnostic errors" and "diagnostic discrepancies," depending on their impact on patient care. The effect of this review on turnaround time was statistically analyzed. A retrospective review of 4,025 cases from the preceding year was performed for comparison. RESULTS: Sixty-six cases with diagnostic disagreements were detected by prospective review. There were 28 diagnostic errors and 38 diagnostic discrepancies. The initial turnaround time for diagnostic FNAC in 90% of total cases was < 24 hours; mean delay for the remainder was 3.3 days. Prospective peer review added a further delay of 1 and 1.5 days, respectively. The number of diagnostic disagreements was significantly higher in the retrospective review (P < .01). CONCLUSION: Prospective peer review of diagnostic FNAC resulted in improved accuracy of diagnosis and reduced potential for inappropriate therapy; however, turnaround time was significantly increased.

Biopsy, Needle↗

Publication patterns of the American Society of Pediatric Neurosurgeons. Is there support among members for peer-reviewed pediatric neurosurgical journals?

The American Society of Pediatric Neurosurgeons (ASPN) has expressed a commitment to have all of its members' qualifying research efforts published in peer-reviewed pediatric neurosurgical journals such as Pediatric Neurosurgery. To test this commitment, citations from January 1985 through December 1994 were analyzed for all 76 current members of the ASPN. The citations were divided into those of general or adult neurosurgical interest, and those of pediatric neurosurgical interest based upon title, key words, and/or abstract. Each pediatric neurosurgical citation was further classified by topic, and by the type of journal in which it appeared (pediatric neurosurgical, general or adult neurosurgical, and other pediatric or adult journal, subspecialty journal, or basic science journal). A total of 1,887 individual author citations were identified during the study period; of these, 1,586 citations (84%) were classified as pediatric neurosurgical citations. These included 1,391 citations from peer-reviewed publications and 195 citations from Concepts in Pediatric Neurosurgery. As a society, the ASPN published only one third of its citations in peer-reviewed pediatric neurosurgery journals; the remainder were cited in general neurosurgical or other journals. Even when only citations from neurosurgical journals (in which pediatric neurosurgeons were more likely to be primary authors and therefore to have more control over the journal of publication) were analyzed, less than 50% of citations appeared in peer-reviewed pediatric neurosurgery journals. Nearly three quarters of ASPN members failed to provide even a modest commitment--publishing 51% or more of their pediatric citations in peer-reviewed pediatric neurosurgical journals. When the analysis was again limited to only those citations published in neurosurgery journals, over half of the members failed this '51% rule'. These results suggest the need for a firmer commitment from ASPN members to publish in peer-reviewed pediatric neurosurgery journals.

Humans↗

Use, costs, and quality of medical services: impact of the New Mexico peer review system. A 1971-1975 study.

To assess the effect of areawide peer review (such as that conducted by Professional Standards Review Organizations [PSROs]) on use, cost and quality of medical services, we evaluated 4 years of data on the efforts of the New Mexico Experimental Medical Care Review Organization in reviewing medical services for the Medicaid population. Utilization review had no demonstrable impact on hospital use; hospital days per 100 eligible persons rose 5.0% and 43.4% for persons enrolled all 4 years in Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and Aid to the Permanently and Totally Disabled, respectively. Peer review produced no net dollar savings; over 4 years, the amount paid for all services per AFDC-eligible person rose 85%. Peer review improved the quality of ambulatory care through large reductions (75%) in medically unnecessary injections. If these findings are replicated elsewhere, they suggest that the goal of the PSRO program to control costs by curtailing utilization may be difficult to achieve, the quality of care goal may be pursued successfully, and the PSRO mission should be focused more on the latter.

Ambulatory Care↗

Attitudes to peer review as a competence assurance structure--results of a survey of Irish physicians.

BACKGROUND: The Medical Council in Ireland is currently implementing Competence Assurance Structures (CAS). Peer review has been proposed as a tool to measure physician competence. AIMS: To assess the attitudes of physicians working in the Irish healthcare system to a peer review programme of competence assurance prior to its implementation. METHODS: A postal survey was sent to all physicians in the Irish Medical Directory in November 2003. Nine questions were asked to gauge attitudes to peer review as a CA tool. The returned questionnaires were collated and data extracted based on responses. RESULTS: The response rate was 67%. The majority of respondents (92%) felt peer review would inform competence assurance in Ireland. Most physicians who were surveyed felt an on-site assessment (88%) every 5 years (87%) was the preferred method. Over 30% responded that there should be a financial incentive for completing a review, and 70% would pay to be assessed. The UK model of competence assurance was the model most physicians preferred for the Irish setting (42%). CONCLUSION: The majority of physicians practising in Ireland would favour a peer review system of competence assurance. The financial implications, and structure, of such a system would need to be explored prior to implementation.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

Assessing peer review in the quest for improved medical services: Part III.

Part I of this article explored flaws in the operation of peer review in the selection of articles for journal publication and decision-making in the award of research grants, and Part II described medical peer review, its practitioners, and the distinctions between medical peer review and other activities and processes aimed at improving the quality of medical performance in hospitals. This part of the article directs attention to how the courts respond when a physician, aggrieved by an adverse determination with regard to appointment, reappointment, or clinical privileges (credentialing) by the hospital based on medical peer review, seeks redress in the courts.

Clinical Competence↗

Peer review. It's good for dentists and patients.

A significant member benefit offered by organized dentistry is peer review. DSSNY President Henry Gaines refers to peer review as "the crown jewel" of the Society's programs. Indeed, dental societies throughout the country look to DSSNY's peer review program as a model for how to provide quality assurance to patients and the profession.

Humans↗

Problem-based writing with peer review improves academic performance in physiology.

The aim of this study was to determine whether problem-based writing with peer review (PW-PR) improves undergraduate student performance on physiology exams. Didactic lectures were replaced with assignments to give students practice explaining their reasoning while solving qualitative problems, thus transferring the responsibility for abstraction and generalization to the students. Performance on exam items about concepts taught using PW-PR was compared with performance on concepts taught using didactic lectures followed by group work. Calibrated Peer Review, a Web-delivered program, was used to collect student essays and to manage anonymous peer review after students "passed" three calibration peer reviews. Results show that the students had difficulty relating concepts. Relationship errors were categorized as (1) problems recognizing levels of organization, (2) problems with cause/effect, and (3) overgeneralizations. For example, some described cells as molecules; others thought that vesicles transport materials through the extracellular fluid. With PW-PR, class discussion was used to confront and resolve such difficulties. Both multiple-choice and essay exam results were better with PW-PR instead of lecture.

Educational Measurement↗

The Department of Defense Civilian External Peer Review Program: an interim report.

During a 2-year period (December 1987-December 1989), 165 Department of Defense (DoD) military hospitals world-wide provided 71,800 cases with 83,197 reviews for quality of care evaluations by the Civilian External Peer Review Program (CEPRP). The majority (78,246 of 79,896) of completed peer review determinations (97.9%) generated agreement with care and documentation. It is concluded that health care in military treatment facilities is of high quality, meeting and generally exceeding accepted standards of care. It is also concluded that the DoD CEPRP offers conceptual and practical experience to guide the further evolution and integration of clinical peer review and quality improvement activities.

Hospital Mortality↗

Is there gender bias in JAMA's peer review process?

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether manuscripts received by JAMA in 1991 possessed differing peer review and manuscript processing characteristics, or had a variable chance of acceptance, associated with the gender of the participants in the peer review process. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of 1851 research articles. SETTING: JAMA editorial office. PARTICIPANTS: Eight male and five female JAMA editors, 2452 male and 930 female reviewers, and 1698 male and 462 female authors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Statistically significant gender bias. RESULTS: Female editors were assigned manuscripts from female corresponding authors more often than were male editors (P < .001). Female editors used more reviewers per manuscript if sent for other review. Male reviewers assisted male editors more often than female editors, and male reviewers took longer to return manuscripts than did their female counterparts (median, 25 vs 22 days). Content reviewer recommendations were independent of corresponding author and review gender, while male statistical reviewers recommended the highest and lowest categories more frequently than did female statistical reviewers (P < .001). Manuscripts handled by female editors were rejected summarily at higher rates (P < .001). Articles submitted to JAMA in 1991 were not accepted at significantly different rates based on the gender of the corresponding author or the assigned editor (P < .4). CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences exist in editor and reviewer characteristics at JAMA with no apparent effect on the final outcome of the peer review process or acceptance for publication.

American Medical Association↗

Benchmarking the quality-monitoring process: a comparison of outcomes analysis by trauma and injury severity score (TRISS) methodology with the peer-review process.

BACKGROUND: One measure of optimal function within a trauma center is the ability to critically examine outcomes from the process of care within the institution, yet guidelines for evaluation of the peer-review process are lacking. This study was conducted to determine the correlation between mortality analysis performed by the peer-review process (PR) within a trauma division and outcome analysis as determined by Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) methodology. METHODS: The mortality peer-review data for an entire year at our level I trauma center served as the study population. Information was obtained on probability of survival, and a determination of preventability was made using standard, preexisting criteria. Peer review involves assigning each outcome to a specific category through the process of multidisciplinary assessment. Probability of survival data was not used for this purpose. Kappa analysis was performed to determine the degree of agreement in each category and then tested for significance. RESULTS: One hundred four deaths in 1,868 trauma patients (5.5%) were reviewed at our multidisciplinary conference. Outcomes were judged as preventable, potentially preventable, or nonpreventable. Death directly related to exsanguination was typically categorized as potentially preventable. Kappa analysis demonstrated the greatest agreement between PR and TRISS in the nonpreventable category (kappa = 0.213) and the least agreement in the potentially preventable category (kappa = -0.197). Overall, the kappa Z statistic was nonsignificant (Z = 1.24). CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary peer-review outcomes analysis is at least as effective as the computer-generated TRISS probability of survival data for evaluating quality of care in a trauma center and may be more effective for analysis of potentially preventable outcomes.

Adolescent↗