An Evaluation of the Accuracy of Peer to Peer Surgical Teaching and the Role of the Peer Review Process

Abstract

Background: Peer to peer learning is a well-established learning modality which has been shown to improve learning outcomes, with positive implications for clinical practice. Surgical students from across Ireland were invited to upload learning points daily while paired with their peers in a peer-reviewing process. This study was designed to assess content accuracy and evaluate the benefit of the review process. Method: A reflective content sample was selected from the database representing all gastrointestinal (GI) surgical entries. All questions and answers were double corrected by four examiners, blinded to the "review" status of the entries. Statistical analysis was performed to compare accuracy between "reviewed" and "non-reviewed" entries. Results: There were 15,569 individual entries from 2009-2013, 2977 were GI surgery entries; 678 (23%) were peer reviewed. Marked out of 5, accuracy in the reviewed group was 4.24 and 4.14 in the nonreviewed group. This was not statistically different (p = 0.11). Accuracy did not differ between universities or grade of tutors. Conclusion: The system of student uploaded data is accurate