peer review

(redirected from Peer-review)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Encyclopedia.

peer review

 
1. a basic component of a quality assurance program in which the results of health care given to a specific patient population are evaluated according to health-wellness outcome criteria established by peers of the professionals delivering the care. Peer review is focused on the patient and on the results of care given by a group of professionals rather than on individual professional practitioners. Review by peer groups is promoted by professional organizations as a means of maintaining standards of care. Retrospective review critically evaluates the results of work that has been completed; it is done for purposes of improving future practice. The source of data is medical records which document the full continuum of care provided and each patient's response to that care. Concurrent review takes place at the time the care is being given. It critically examines each patient's progress toward desired health-wellness outcomes. Sources of data for concurrent review are the patient's record and interview, observation, and inspection of the patient. A major advantage of concurrent review is that it provides the opportunity to improve care so that patients benefit from the review and recommended changes in ongoing care.
2. in the nursing interventions classification, a nursing intervention defined as the systematic evaluation of a peer's performance compared with professional standards of practice.
3. Evaluation of a manuscript or research proposal by professional colleagues.

peer re·view

(pēr rē-vyū'),
Process of evaluating research proposals, manuscripts submitted for publication, and abstracts submitted for presentation at a scientific meeting, whereby these are judged for technical and scientific merit by other scientists in the same field.

peer review

The objective evaluation of the quality of a physician's or a scientist's performance by colleagues Medtalk The evaluation of a practitioner's professional performance, including identification of opportunities for improving the quality, necessity, and appropriateness–suitability of care; peer review organizations–PROs in the US contract with the CMS, formerly HCFA. See Peer-reviewed journal, Peer review organization.

peer re·view

(pēr rĕ-vyū')
Assessment of research proposals, manuscripts submitted for publication, or a physician's clinical practice by other physicians or scientists in the same field.

peer re·view

(pēr rĕ-vyū')
Assessment of research proposals, manuscripts submitted for publication, or a physician's clinical practice by other physicians or scientists in the same field.
References in periodicals archive ?
Several sources emphasize the benefits and necessity of a peer-review form for improved professionalism and quality in the review process.
This Note argues that the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit should become the first circuit to recognize the medical peer-review privilege in cases that include federal and state claims.
(1) It provides interesting insights into the peer-review process as it currently exists, and it highlights some of the problems and shortcomings that warrant further consideration.
Science and scholarship, like peer-review, are answerable and self-corrective.
Unlike most peer-review programs, Toledo's does not exist in conjunction with periodic principal evaluations.
This could be a particularly compelling document if the working group concludes that the existing peer-review system is in fact fundamentally flawed.
Peer-review validity lies in the ability to predict which articles or proposals will stimulate the most progress in a given field of study.
* NSF will develop a computerized roster of outside researchers "on call" to peer-review its grant proposals.
We feel that reviewers benefit from seeing the evaluations of others and that the process of sharing reviewers' comments leads to a continual overall improvement in the peer-review process itself.
WAME is free and open to all editors of peer-reviewed medical journals.
"I've never had one client ask me if I was 'peer-reviewed,' but I wouldn't hesitate to disclose the report," says Steven Saxenian, CPA, part of a two-person tax practice, Carlisto & Saxenian in Mamaroneck, New York.
Open Access is an emerging publishing model for peer-reviewed scientific research in which authors and their publishers grant free access to their work as long as the authors are acknowledged and the publisher ensures that the work is made freely available in a digital archive (1).