Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Implementing a peer review system in a neonatal ICU

L B Altimier

    Nursing Management
    |September 1, 1995
    PubMed
    Summary

    A redesigned performance evaluation system evolved into a robust professional peer review system over three years. This involved auditing, formal communication, and program evaluation to establish the final peer review framework.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Can you make a merger pay off?

    Nursing management·2004
    Same author

    Cross-training in 3-D.

    Nursing management·2000
    Same author

    One Touch II hospital system for neonates: correlation with serum glucose values.

    Neonatal network : NN·1996
    Same author

    Pediatric central neurologic trauma: issues for special patients.

    AACN clinical issues in critical care nursing·1992

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Education
    • Healthcare Management

    Background:

    • Performance evaluation systems require regular updates to maintain effectiveness.
    • Establishing a professional peer review system is crucial for quality assurance in healthcare.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To detail the three-year process of redesigning a performance evaluation system.
    • To describe the phased implementation and evaluation of a professional peer review system.

    Main Methods:

    • Phased implementation over three years.
    • Year 1: Auditing peers on established indicators.
    • Year 2: Establishing formal written communications.
    • Year 3: Program evaluation and system refinement.

    Main Results:

    • Successful establishment of a professional peer review system.
    • Development of structured auditing and communication protocols.
    • Iterative improvements based on program evaluation.

    Conclusions:

    • A systematic, multi-year approach can effectively develop a comprehensive peer review system.
    • Phased implementation with feedback loops ensures a robust and functional evaluation framework.

    Related Experiment Videos