Discussion Between Reviewers Does Not Improve Reliability of Peer Review of Hospital Quality
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
TL;DR
When 2 physicians discuss a record that they are reviewing, it substantially improves the agreement between those 2 physicians, but this improvement is illusory, as discussion does not improve the overall reliability as assessed by examining the reliability between physicians who were part of different discussions.
Abstract
When 2 physicians discuss a record that they are reviewing, it substantially improves the agreement between those 2 physicians. However, this improvement is illusory, as discussion does not improve the overall reliability as assessed by examining the reliability between physicians who were part of different discussions. This finding may also have implications with regard to how disagreements are resolved on consensus panels, guideline committees, and reviews of literature quality for meta-analyses.
