Education and peer review.

The success of a peer review system to assure quality of psychological services depends on its acceptance by psychologists, consumers, and 3rd-party agents. Educational efforts aimed at these 3 target groups are important in facilitating that acceptance. The present study outlines components of the educational program adopted by the developers of the American Psychological Association/CHAMPUS (Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services) peer review system. Components that, although not part of the CHAMPUS system, should be included in an ideal educational effort are also outlined. (4 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Political aspects of peer review.

Discusses professional psychology's increasing recognition in federal health-care legislation. Whether psychology is eventually included in a national health insurance bill will be primarily determined by political considerations, including psychology's relationship with organized medicine, its credibility within the federal bureaucracy, and its performance in the development of standards for care and assurance of quality. It is concluded that psychology's success in developing a workable system of quality assurance through peer review may be the profession's most important asset in determining its role in future legislation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Adolescent personality factors in self-ratings and peer nominations and their prediction of peer acceptance and peer rejection

In this study, the robustness of the Big Five personality factors in adolescents' self-ratings and peer nominations was investigated. Data were obtained on 2,001 adolescents attending secondary school (885 girls; 1,116 boys; M age = 14.5 years). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses on the self-ratings confirmed the Big Five personality factors. In contrast, exploratory analysis on the peer nominations revealed five different factors: Aggression-Inattentiveness, Achievement-Withdrawal, Self-Confidence, Sociability, and Emotionality-Nervousness. It is suggested that peers evaluate group members not in terms of their personality but in terms of their group reputation. Peer evaluations contributed substantially to the prediction of peer acceptance and rejection; the Big Five personality factors based on self-ratings did not.     

A model system of peer review.

Discusses issues involved in the establishment of an effective system of peer review of mental health services: selection of reviewers and cases for review, development of criteria for review, documentation, management of the review process, and management of information (including confidentiality). Decisions regarding most of these issues may be made at the local agency level. A national system of peer review that would facilitate the development of local review systems and provide the support necessary to ensure the acceptance of quality assurance efforts as routine professional activities is presented. The system would function on 4 levels. The 1st 2 levels would function locally and involve selection by trained nonpsychologists of cases for review and review of those cases by a committee of professionals. At the 3rd level, a peer review consortium would review special cases; and at the 4th level, a group supported by the American Psychological Association would assist local agencies in the development of peer review systems and would serve other policymaking functions. (6 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The philosophical underpinnings of peer review.

The current impetus for peer review had its origin in issues of cost containment, bolstered by intentions to improve quality of service. Peer review is usually conceived of as a way to either police a profession by ridding it of the few "bad actors" or to assure that services delivered meet minimum standards. The present article argues, however, that a more useful philosophy of peer review is to assume that it is at the heart of the definition of a profession. (2 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Professional psychology in California responds to the special issue on peer review.

The recent Special Issue of Professional Psychology (February 1982) raises serious questions about our profession's involvement in programs of peer review and quality assurance. You can be sure that it was read with great interest by clinical psychologists here in California. We call on you, as the editor of Professional Psychology, to continue and to expand your exploration of the issues involved in peer review and quality assurance programs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Safeguarding the public's trust through the self-governance of peer review

1. Nurses must monitor the quality of professional practice in order to safeguard the public's trust in nursing as a professional discipline and to ensure that nursing is self-regulating, accountable, and autonomous. 2. A peer review process indicates self-governance and advances the profession of nursing. 3. A peer review committee is responsible for gathering information, evaluating nursing practice, and reporting the findings to the nurse and the initiator of the review. Any deliberate or negligent acts or omissions of the nurse under review are reported to the state board of nursing.     

Why do we need peer review?

Some nurses see peer review as a threatening experience and put up defense mechanisms to resist change. Others are recognizing it as a popular performance-appraisal strategy that will enhance their autonomy and accountability within their professional practice. But why do we need it? And what are the benefits?     

Psychiatric peer review: a working model

The author describes a system for psychiatric peer review developed by a peer review committee in a general hospital. At the heart of the system is a form called the peer review check sheet, which requires the physician to specify diagnosis, reasons for hospitalization, and major symptom complexes, as well as laboratory work and treatment and discharge plans. Minimal criteria have been established to verify the diagnoses and to justify the need for hospitalization. Each month the check sheets are removed from the charts of patients who have been discharged and sent to committee members for evaluation. Those that are incomplete or unsatisfactory signal the need to examine the patient's chart.     

An evaluation of the Aetna pilot peer review project.

Describes a 6-mo trial peer review project in which the 3rd-party payer requested treatment reports from psychologist providers, submitted 45 selected cases to reviewers designated by the American Psychological Association, and received recommendation from these reviewers. The characteristics of the patients, the type of treatment provided, and the characteristics of the reviewers are outlined. Differences in the judged adequacy of treatment were related to factors such as the reviewer's gender and theoretical orientation, the frequency of sessions, the therapeutic orientation of the provider, and the gender of the patient. Problems related to poor documentation and the potential of peer review in improving patient care are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A review of evaluations of peer education programs

Although peer education programs have existed on the college campus for many years, few evaluations of their effectiveness have been made. The author reviews the brief literature on process and outcome evaluations and offers suggestions to encourage evaluations that will yield more accurate and useful information. Such information is particularly important at a time when many universities face budgetary constraints that put these programs and those who administer them at risk when programs and services are curtailed.     

Professional standards review organization, peer review, and CHAMPUS.

Describes an American-Psychological-Association-developed system of peer review of ambulatory service plans provided by psychologists to beneficiaries of the Civilian Health Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS). It is argued that the system provides an alternative model that includes defined standards of care applied by psychologists. (3 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

What we owe the author: rethinking editorial peer review

Oxidation is widely assumed to play a causal role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Oxidative modification of low density lipoprotein (LDL) can be followed by analyzing the lag phase of the conjugated diene formation at 234 nm in LDL exposed to Cu2+. This procedure is restricted to isolated LDL fractions. To make this assay applicable to different biological systems, the present paper introduces a method to determine the time course of lipid peroxidation by measuring the EPR signal intensity and thereby the concentration of the radicals formed. Stable radical spin adducts were generated using the spin trap PBN (N-tert.-butyl-alpha-phenylnitrone) and were detected by EPR spectroscopy. Comparing the specific formation of radicals and the generation of conjugated dienes as measured by UV absorbance revealed analogous lag, propagation and decomposition phases.