Cargando…
Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform
Clinical peer review, a process mandated across all hospitals in the USA, originated as a measure to protect patients by ensuring a standardized level of medical service that is provided by all practicing physicians. The process involves retrospective chart reviewing to assess the quality of patient...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8604442/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34804397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20009666.2021.1965704 |
_version_ | 1784601961699475456 |
---|---|
author | Bader, Husam Abdulelah, Mohammad Maghnam, Rama Chin, David |
author_facet | Bader, Husam Abdulelah, Mohammad Maghnam, Rama Chin, David |
author_sort | Bader, Husam |
collection | PubMed |
description | Clinical peer review, a process mandated across all hospitals in the USA, originated as a measure to protect patients by ensuring a standardized level of medical service that is provided by all practicing physicians. The process involves retrospective chart reviewing to assess the quality of patients’ care provided by physicians as well as adherence to the most appropriate guidelines. The process of clinical peer review almost entirely serves its ultimate purpose in quality preservation; However, certain laws gave immunity to reviewers resulting in abuse and using the clinical peer review process for secondary gain. Some notable cases of abuse were discussed in the article, we also shed light on two forms of bias that can potentially interfere with the review process and the dreaded outcomes that come along a negative peer review. We also propose methods to overcome these biases to further standardize and improve this crucial process. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8604442 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Taylor & Francis |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86044422021-11-20 Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform Bader, Husam Abdulelah, Mohammad Maghnam, Rama Chin, David J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect Perspective Clinical peer review, a process mandated across all hospitals in the USA, originated as a measure to protect patients by ensuring a standardized level of medical service that is provided by all practicing physicians. The process involves retrospective chart reviewing to assess the quality of patients’ care provided by physicians as well as adherence to the most appropriate guidelines. The process of clinical peer review almost entirely serves its ultimate purpose in quality preservation; However, certain laws gave immunity to reviewers resulting in abuse and using the clinical peer review process for secondary gain. Some notable cases of abuse were discussed in the article, we also shed light on two forms of bias that can potentially interfere with the review process and the dreaded outcomes that come along a negative peer review. We also propose methods to overcome these biases to further standardize and improve this crucial process. Taylor & Francis 2021-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8604442/ /pubmed/34804397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20009666.2021.1965704 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of Greater Baltimore Medical Center. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Perspective Bader, Husam Abdulelah, Mohammad Maghnam, Rama Chin, David Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform |
title | Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform |
title_full | Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform |
title_fullStr | Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform |
title_short | Clinical peer Review; A mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform |
title_sort | clinical peer review; a mandatory process with potential inherent bias in desperate need of reform |
topic | Perspective |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8604442/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34804397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20009666.2021.1965704 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT baderhusam clinicalpeerreviewamandatoryprocesswithpotentialinherentbiasindesperateneedofreform AT abdulelahmohammad clinicalpeerreviewamandatoryprocesswithpotentialinherentbiasindesperateneedofreform AT maghnamrama clinicalpeerreviewamandatoryprocesswithpotentialinherentbiasindesperateneedofreform AT chindavid clinicalpeerreviewamandatoryprocesswithpotentialinherentbiasindesperateneedofreform |