Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Clinical peer review, also known as medical peer review is the process by which health care professionals, including those in nursing and pharmacy, evaluate each other's clinical performance. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] A discipline-specific process may be referenced accordingly (e.g., physician peer review , nursing peer review ).
Medical peer review may be distinguished in four classifications: [20] Clinical peer review is a procedure for assessing a patient's involvement with experiences of ...
An independent medical review (IMR) is the process where physicians review medical cases in order to provide claims determinations for health insurance payers, workers compensation insurance payers or disability insurance payers. Peer review also is used in order to define the review of sentinel events in a hospital environment for quality ...
A systematic review is a scholarly synthesis of the evidence on a clearly presented topic using critical methods to identify, define and assess research on the topic. [1] A systematic review extracts and interprets data from published studies on the topic (in the scientific literature), then analyzes, describes, critically appraises and summarizes interpretations into a refined evidence-based ...
Medical peer review, the process of refereeing healthcare practitioner decisions; Peer feedback, a classroom practice where students give each other feedback; Physician peer review, the process by which physicians evaluate each other to promote better quality of care; Scholarly peer review, the process of refereeing scholarly papers
The process of review articles being peer-reviewed is critical to their credibility. [9] The peer review process is a way to ensure the article is as polished and accurate as possible. Most often, those reviewing the article are fellow academics or experts within the field under discussion in the paper.
Some broad categories might be editorial review, peer review, and blind peer review. Richard Smith, former editor of the British Medical Journal, stated in 2006 that studies had found peer review to be ineffective and prone to abuse, but noted that editors consider it invaluable. [4]
The peer review Bulletin specifically addresses the effect of publication in a refereed scientific journal as well the variations and limitations with peer review: Publication in a refereed scientific journal may mean that adequate peer review has been performed. However, the intensity of peer review is highly variable across journals.