Peer review checklist: reproducibility and validity of a method for evaluating the quality of ambulatory care.

Abstract

This report describes the construction and evaluation of a 35-item checklist used in performing peer review of ambulatory medical records. Scores obtained by using the checklist were evaluated for reproducibility. Ten reviewers, reviewing ten records on each of two occasions judged the records consistently item by item, 74 per cent of the time; 53 per cent greater than expected by chance (p < 0.01). Pairs of reviewers, reviewing the same ten records, were consistent with one another, item by item, 72 per cent of the time; 35 per cent greater than expected by chance (p < 0.05).Ten sick call patients were reexamined by an especially trained Reevaluation Physician who evaluated the quality with which they had been managed at the

Inter-rater reliability of case-note audit: a systematic review

“…[2][3][4]6,9,10,[12][13][14][17][18][19][20]24,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47] Six papers 3,12,17,20,29,30 were excluded because they used large numbers of raters. The remaining 27 papers had all used two or three raters.…”

“…Goldman 8 conducted a review of 12 studies published between the years 1959-1991. 4,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] We extended and updated that review and sought to introduce a taxonomical layer by examining different types of quality measurement with respect to what is being assessed and how it is being assessed.…”

Cultural competence and quality of care: Issues for mental health service delivery in managed care.

“…Thus, a central challenge is to identify process measures that can be used as proxy indicators for eventual outcome, and to link improvements in the process of care to improvements in patient outcome (Mattson, 1984). Even though some medical studies indicate that carefully derived process criteria are predictive of medical outcomes (Hastings, Sonneborn, Lee, Vick, & Sasmor, 1980; Mates & Sidel, 1981), mental health outcomes are more difficult to quantify. In reality, the choice of whether to conduct process or outcomes studies is often bound to the nature of the data and data collection techniques that are available (Brook et al, 1982).…”

Assessing Peer Review in the Quest for Improved Medical Services: Part II

“…A number of medical care studies illustrate the use of expert physician panels to develop criteria lists against which physician performance is measured (10,11). Various processes with differing degrees of interaction have been employed in refining initial criteria lists proposed by experts (12)(13)(14).…”