The peer review procedure and its place in medicine

被引:8
作者
Chop, Ines [1 ]
Eberlein-Gonska, Maria [2 ]
机构
[1] Bundesarztekammer, Dezernat Qualitatssicherung 3, Berlin, Germany
[2] Tech Univ Dresden, Zent Bereich Qualitats & Med Risikomanagement, Univ Klinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
来源
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR EVIDENZ FORTBILDUNG UND QUALITAET IM GESUNDHEITSWESEN | 2012年 / 106卷 / 08期
关键词
peer review; self-reflection; expert discussion; quality improvement; curriculum medical peer review;
D O I
10.1016/j.zefq.2012.08.017
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Peer Review literally meaning "re-inspection by a peer'' is a special form of external evaluation whose roots go back to Ancient Greece and which is widely employed in science to assess manuscripts submitted for publication. In the medical context the Peer Review process is defined as structured critical self-reflection through dialogue with colleagues. Its prime objective is to improve the quality of patient care by identifying potentials for improvement and by deriving an action plan. Amongst other things, this includes medical standards and guidelines, indications and their traceability, the monitoring of the treatment process as well as the interdisciplinary cooperation and teamwork between different professional groups. The Peer Review practice in Germany has received strong impetus from comprehensive hospital operator projects like IQM, the "Initiative Qualitatsmedizin'', and the Peer Review practice in intensive care. This practice, which has primarily been developed by practitioners for practitioners of their own accord, offers the chance to integrate medical quality with little bureaucratic effort and direct transfer of knowledge back into daily clinical work. Another important approach to promote peer reviewer qualifications is the curriculum "Medical Peer Review'', which has been published by the German Medical Association since 2011.
引用
收藏
页码:547 / 552
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Focused Peer Review: The End Game of Peer Review
    Hussain, Sarwat
    Hussain, Jawad S.
    Karam, Adib
    Vijayaraghavan, Gopal
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2012, 9 (06) : 430 - 433
  • [22] Verbesserung der Prozessqualität in der Schlafmedizin durch ein Peer-Review-VerfahrenImprovement of process quality in sleep medicine by means of peer review
    Marcus Kutschmann
    Friedhart Raschke
    Jürgen Fischer
    Somnologie - Schlafforschung und Schlafmedizin, 2002, 6 (2) : 85 - 92
  • [23] Radiologist Peer Review by Group Consensus
    Harvey, H. Benjamin
    Alkasab, Tarik K.
    Prabhakar, Anand M.
    Halpern, Elkan F.
    Rosenthal, Daniel I.
    Pandharipande, Pari V.
    Gazelle, G. Scott
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2016, 13 (06) : 656 - 662
  • [24] Peer review
    Kemerink, Martijn
    TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR RECHTSGESCHIEDENIS-REVUE D HISTOIRE DU DROIT-THE LEGAL HISTORY REVIEW, 2019, 87 (03): : 291 - 298
  • [25] Peer review
    O'Doherty, Kieran
    THEORY & PSYCHOLOGY, 2019, 29 (02) : 155 - 157
  • [26] Voluntary Review of Quality of Care peer review for patient safety
    Stumpf, Paul G.
    BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH IN CLINICAL OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2007, 21 (04): : 557 - 564
  • [27] On peer review in computer science: analysis of its effectiveness and suggestions for improvement
    Azzurra Ragone
    Katsiaryna Mirylenka
    Fabio Casati
    Maurizio Marchese
    Scientometrics, 2013, 97 : 317 - 356
  • [28] Engaged and Interactive Peer Review: Introducing Peer Review Circles
    Manning, Shaun Justin
    Jobbitt, Todd
    RELC JOURNAL, 2019, 50 (03) : 475 - 482
  • [29] On peer review in computer science: analysis of its effectiveness and suggestions for improvement
    Ragone, Azzurra
    Mirylenka, Katsiaryna
    Casati, Fabio
    Marchese, Maurizio
    SCIENTOMETRICS, 2013, 97 (02) : 317 - 356
  • [30] Conflict(s) of Interest in Peer Review: Its Origins and Possible Solutions
    Anton Oleinik
    Science and Engineering Ethics, 2014, 20 : 55 - 75