peer review

(redirected from Peer-reviewed)
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 ?
Keywords: peer-reviewed journal, scientific journal, peer review, research journal
The hierarchy of peer-reviewed journals grades down from the highest quality ones at the top, with the most rigorous peer review and usually the highest rejection rates and impact factors (for their respective fields) all the way down to a virtual vanity press at the bottom.
But what I doubt is that there is 1) a specific abuse peculiar to the peer-reviewed research literature as opposed to anything else on the Net or that 2) anything specific follows from this about the inadvisability or danger in providing open online access to this peer-reviewed research literature.
Nearly half refer to publications from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and most of the rest refer to studies from such agencies as the World Meteorological Organization and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and to peer-reviewed articles from Science, Nature, the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, and the like.
(Needless to say, Schneider has not followed his own stringent rule about citing only peer-reviewed articles when discussing scientific issues and public policy.
However, Parker says, the RSC considers the final, peer-reviewed article to be the most definitive information for dissemination either in print or electronically.
One of the RSC's journals can post electronic versions of peer-reviewed, author-revised papers as soon as 70 days after submission, notes Parker.
Although peer-reviewed papers will be the primary focus of the new publication, we realized that it can and should offer more, including material that would be exclusive to subscribers.
The renewal forms include an option to subscribe to the new TAPPI peer-reviewed journal.
You may also wonder, what happened to TAPPI JOURNAL, what is happening with peer-reviewed papers, and what's next?