Medical study review system flawed
Patient Safety Monitor Alert, August 29, 2005
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Patient Safety Monitor Alert!
A third of studies submitted to prestigious journals and peer-reviewed are ultimately found to be exaggerated or contradicted, according to an article in The Boston Globe. That has some experts calling for a review of the review process.
Suggestions include making reviews public, instead of the anonymous reviews currently employed. That way, others with questions can confer with the Journal's reviewers. Allowing online responses to studies is another suggested solution.
Currently, there are no standards for peer review, although journals pride themselves on the thoroughness of their vetting processes.
To read the article, click here.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Patient Safety Monitor Alert!
Related Products
-
Patient Safety Monitor
As part of your Patient Safety Monitor membership, you'll receive Briefings on Patient Safety. In this 12-page monthly...
-
Patient Safety Monitor Alert
This e-mail newsletter provides healthcare professionals with the latest patient safety news, while offering useful...
-
Patient Safety Quality Monthly
Ken Rohde, Senior Consultant for The Greeley Company with over 25 years of experience in quality management. His roles in...
-
Occurrence Reporting:
Take advantage of the information occurrence reports provide and make sustainable enhancements at your facility. Expert...
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q&A: Coding 'aspiration without pneumonia'
- Q&A tackles coding questions about injections and infusions
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Hospitalist-surgeon comanagement has no effect on outcomes
- Case Management Monthly, June 2012
- Searched