SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “peer”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

PubMed1993

New morbidity-problems and peer relations in a sample of Swedish primary school children: a follow-up from the first to the third grade.

The stability in the new morbidity-problem domains motor skills, reading/writing ability, behavioral-psychological-social function and concentration ability in school, and the stability of peer status and peer preferences as well as relationships between peer status and problems among boys and girls was studied in a sample of 81 Swedish primary school children. The children were rated by teachers and made peer nominations six months after school start, and in the third grade. There was considerable stability in problems, while the stability in peer status was modest. There were marked gender differences. Boys in contrast to girls improved in motor skills from the first to the third grade, and boys had more concentration problems and multiple problems than girls in both grades 1 and 3. In the first grade low peer acceptance in boys was accompanied by low motor skills. In the third grade, low peer acceptance in boys was accompanied by deficient concentration ability and externalizing problems. For girls, few relationships between low peer acceptance and problems emerged Various explanations for these findings are discussed.

Child↗

PubMed2006

Conflict of Interest Disclosure Policies and Practices in Peer-reviewed Biomedical Journals.

OBJECTIVE: We undertook this investigation to characterize conflict of interest (COI) policies of biomedical journals with respect to authors, peer-reviewers, and editors, and to ascertain what information about COI disclosures is publicly available. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of 135 editors of peer-reviewed biomedical journals that publish original research. We chose an international selection of general and specialty medical journals that publish in English. Selection was based on journal impact factor, and the recommendations of experts in the field. We developed and pilot tested a 3-part web-based survey. The survey included questions about the presence of specific policies for authors, peer-reviewers, and editors, specific restrictions on authors, peer-reviewers, and editors based on COI, and the public availability of these disclosures. Editors were contacted a minimum of 3 times. RESULTS: The response rate for the survey was 91 (67%) of 135, and 85 (93%) of 91 journals reported having an author COI policy. Ten (11%) journals reported that they restrict author submissions based on COI (e.g., drug company authors' papers on their products are not accepted). While 77% report collecting COI information on all author submissions, only 57% publish all author disclosures. A minority of journals report having a specific policy on peer-reviewer 46% (42/91) or editor COI 40% (36/91); among these, 25% and 31% of journals state that they require recusal of peer-reviewers and editors if they report a COI. Only 3% of respondents publish COI disclosures of peer-reviewers, and 12% publish editor COI disclosures, while 11% and 24%, respectively, reported that this information is available upon request. CONCLUSION: Many more journals have a policy regarding COI for authors than they do for peer-reviewers or editors. Even author COI policies are variable, depending on the type of manuscript submitted. The COI information that is collected by journals is often not published; the extent to which such "secret disclosure" may impact the integrity of the journal or the published work is not known.

Conflict of Interest↗

PubMed1989

Relationship between social perception and peer status in children with learning disabilities.

This study was undertaken to examine the social perceptual skill deficit theory in explaining the low peer acceptance of children with learning disabilities. The quality of tests measuring social perception was also examined. Thirty 9- to 12-year-old children with learning disabilities and a matched control group were given two measures of social perception: a laboratory task and a behavior rating scale. The behavior rating scale was completed by the children's teachers. In addition, the Peer Acceptance Scale (Bruininks, Rynders, & Gross, 1974) was administered to assess peer status. Results showed that the children with learning disabilities differed significantly from their nondisabled peers on each of the three measures-the children with learning disabilities obtained lower social perception and peer acceptance scores. However, the relationships between sociometric status and social perception varied as a function of task. A small but significant correlation wa found between the behavior rating scale and peer status. The laboratory task was not correlated with either the behavior rating scale or peer status. Results are discussed in terms of the psychometric properties of laboratory versus naturalistic measures of social perception and the importance of establishing the external validity of social skill measures by correlating them with outcome measures such as peer status.

Child↗

PubMed1990

Assessing peer review in the quest for improved medical services and the implications for education in quality assessment: Part IV.

Three court decisions reviewing medical peer review conducted in hospitals were discussed at length in part III of this article. In their opinions the courts gave at least tacit approval to the procedures followed in the hospitals, and they accepted that an evidentiary basis for adverse action against the physicians was present. But not all medical peer review in hospitals resulting in adverse actions is found satisfactory when challenged in court, and the most prominent litigation in the decade of the 1980s concerning medical peer review, Patrick v. Burget (1), is testimony to the potential for its perversion. Part II adverted to the potential for bias or lack of objectivity in assessing physician performance. Part I mentioned the problem of bias in the context of peer review of articles for publication and of research grant proposals. The objectives of Part IV are: (1) to examine the concern about bias in medical peer review and to indicate how it may be lessened, if not eliminated; (2) to address further the difficulty created by the relative lack of valid criteria to employ in medical peer review; (3) to review the extent of protection from liability afforded to participants in medical peer review; and (4) to describe the changes that should be anticipated in review of medical services in the future. Before addressing these subjects it is essential to remind the reader that medical peer review is not conducted primarily for disciplinary purposes; rather, its purpose is to evaluate the quality of care.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Bias↗

PubMed2004

Young adults' support strategies when peers disclose suicidal intent.

In response to the growing suicide rate among adolescents and young adults, researchers have noted the importance of peer responses to suicidal disclosures in this population. The most adaptive response is to inform a responsible adult about the suicidal peer, but existing data indicate that most adolescents and young adults choose to talk to the peer on their own. The present study examined whether young adults' own history of suicidal ideation, gender, social history with suicide, and ambiguity of the disclosure would predict their response to a hypothetical suicidal peer. The data revealed significant effects of ambiguity and participants' suicidal ideation on the confidants' response strategy. The confidants' experience with others' attempted or completed suicides increased their likelihood of saving they would tell an authority, whereas their own history of ideation or attempts reduced the likelihood of that response. These effects were most pronounced when the hypothetical peer's suicidal intent was not completely clear, which may often be the case in disclosures by suicidal adolescents. Youth and young adults should be encouraged to inform adults about suicidal peers, particularly those who have been suicidal themselves previously, and who may resist that strategy. It is postulated that these particular peers may be more easily convinced to respond in this manner if they could be involved in the intervention with their suicidal peer.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1997

Academic effects of providing peer support in general education classrooms on students without disabilities.

We studied the academic effects on peers without disabilities of serving as peer supports for students with disabilities in general education classrooms. Three peers were studied using a range of indicators, including academic engagement, coursework performance, and social validity assessments. Peers assisting a student with disabilities via curricular adaptation, assignment completion, and social facilitation constituted the multicomponent independent variable. We used withdrawal or multiple baseline designs to demonstrate positive benefits for peers for all measures used. In addition, follow-up data for 2 peers indicated that the positive changes associated with serving as a peer support were maintained for up to 2 months. Our results are discussed in relation to the possible academic and social effects of providing peer supports in general education classrooms for students with and without disabilities.

Achievement↗

PubMed1996

Group peer review: a questionnaire-based survey.

OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the findings from a questionnaire-based survey of psychiatrists designed to elucidate the positive and negative aspects of group peer review and its perceived place in accountability procedures, and to provide information about how accountability through group peer review might be improved. METHOD: Three hundred and eighty-eight psychiatrists were surveyed via mailout questionnaire. Demographic data, details of groups, and perceptions of beneficial and detrimental effects of group peer review were sought from group participants and non-participants. Attitudes of participants were compared with those of non-participants. Features of groups related to satisfaction in participants were examined. RESULTS: The majority of the 170 respondents participating in groups regarded peer review as a means of maintaining and improving skills, sharing ideas and methods, receiving constructive criticism and feedback, of educational benefit and an important source of professional accountability. Non-participants, while less positive overall, responded equally that participation in peer review groups would be an effective response to accountability procedures. Potential detrimental effects and problems with the functioning of peer review groups were elucidated. CONCLUSIONS: Group peer review contributes significantly to professional accountability and education in well-functioning groups. Further strategies for the facilitation of group functioning and for the processing of problems arising in group peer review need to be developed to optimise its contribution to the maintenance and improvement of professional standards.

Adolescent Psychiatry↗

PubMed1996

Group peer review in psychiatry: the relationship to quality improvement and quality care.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to elucidate the contribution of peer review groups involving psychiatrists to quality improvement and quality care. METHOD: Audio-taped interviews of groups engaged in peer review were analysed using a qualitative methodology. Participants' views of the ways in which they experienced and conceptualised peer review were explored. RESULTS: The views of participants in peer review groups were analysed, and categories evolved which identified differences in how they perceived the structure and function of group peer review. CONCLUSIONS: Participants in the groups studied perceived peer review as a professional growth forum within a quality improvement framework providing critical review of treatment, continuing education, and a sense of collegiality. Boundaries of acceptable practice were tested and defined. At its best, participation in peer review groups enhanced reflective practice which achieved new understandings of clinical work. In this regard, peer review is seen as a highly desirable method for the maintenance of professional standards.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed1985

Adolescent marijuana and alcohol use: the role of parents and peers revisited.

The present study focuses on the role of deviant peers, parent child-rearing practices, and parent alcohol use in the initiation of marijuana and alcohol use during adolescence. Composite measures of Deviant Peers and Parental Monitoring were used that incorporate both the parents' and child's report of these variables as well as the parents' report of their own alcohol use and the adolescent's report of marijuana and alcohol use. Multiple regression analyses incorporating Parental Monitoring, Mother Alcohol Use, and Deviant Peers as independent variables revealed significant standardized b coefficients for Deviant Peers predicting alcohol use, and both Parental Monitoring and Deviant Peers predicting marijuana use. A profile analysis showed that delinquent drug users had lower parental monitoring and more deviant peers than nondelinquent drug users or abstainers. However, a group of youngsters were identified who reported some substance use but were not antisocial; these youngsters resembled abstainers in respect to the degree that they were monitored by parents and exposed to deviant peers. Taking these results into consideration, along with longitudinal studies on adolescent delinquency and adult alcoholism, it is hypothesized that adolescent delinquency and drug use are outcomes of disrupted family processes and exposure to deviant peers, and that adolescents who are both antisocial and use drugs may be at higher risk for eventual substance abuse.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

The planning and implementation of a faculty peer review teaching project.

OBJECTIVES: Describe the planning and implementation of a pilot peer review system, assess factors related to acceptance by faculty and administration, and suggest ways to increase the number of faculty members reviewed and serving as reviewers. DESIGN: A faculty-driven process was used to create a model for peer review. Faculty members completed a survey instrument with open-ended responses for indicating reasons for participation or nonparticipation, components of the evaluation process that they would like to see changed, and what they found most helpful or insightful about the process of peer review. ASSESSMENT: Faculty acceptance of and satisfaction with the peer review process is attributed to the development and implementation process being faculty driven and to peer reviews not being required for promotion and tenure decisions. Faculty members who were reviewed stated that the process was helpful and insightful and would lead to better teaching and learning. CONCLUSION: A successful faculty peer-review process was created and implemented within 6 weeks. All of the faculty members who chose to be peer reviewed or serve as reviewers reported satisfaction in gaining insights into their teaching, learning innovative approaches to their teaching, and gaining confidence in their teaching pedagogy. Techniques for achieving 100% participation in the peer review process should be addressed in the future.

Faculty↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Preventable trauma deaths: evaluation by peer review and a guide for quality improvement. Emergency Medical Study Group for Quality.

BACKGROUND: The trauma-injury severity-score (TRISS) methodology was developed in the United States to calculate the probability of survival for trauma patients presenting for emergency care. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the utility of using the TRISS methodology to identify preventable trauma deaths and compared the results to peer review using explicit standards. METHODS: Explicit peer review standards were developed by a focus group. The validity of these standards was evaluated by comparing the results of peer review performed by two independent expert panels. All trauma cases admitted to 10 centers in Japan between April 1, 1994, and March 31, 1996, were evaluated using the TRISS methodology. Cases with an expected probability of survival of more than 0.5 were considered preventable. These cases were subjected to peer review. Patients who were dead on arrival were excluded from analysis. RESULTS: Of 3,125 patients who were not dead on arrival, the TRISS methodology identified 2,525 as having a probability of survival greater than 0.5. In this group, 189 patients died; thus, 25.3% of all deaths were considered preventable by the TRISS method. Peer review found that only 11.2% of the deaths were preventable; thus, only 46.6% of preventable deaths identified by TRISS were confirmed by peer review. Agreement between the two expert peer review panels was very good (kappa = 0.62). CONCLUSION: TRISS can be used as a screening tool to identify potentially preventable trauma deaths. Peer review is appropriate to confirm preventability and to identify potential medical errors.

Data Collection↗

PubMed2000

The myth of peer pressure.

The construct of peer pressure was examined as part of a qualitative study of the determinants of mental health for 41 high-risk adolescents. While the concept of peer pressure enables adults to explain youths' troubling behaviors, content analysis of the participants' accounts of their lives revealed peer pressure to be a myth. The youths indicated that adoption of the behavior and appearance of peers was a consciously employed strategy to enhance personal and social power. Association with peers was used to construct and maintain health-promoting identities that challenged the stigmatizing labels given to them by others. Three developmental stages to this process of identity construction were identified. During stage one, vulnerable youths learn to maintain a singular self-definition through interaction with peers. In stage two, youths purposefully use their peer relations to experiment with multiple identities. During stage three, youths collaborate with peers as equal partners in the construction of one or more identities for which they find acceptance.

Acting Out↗

PubMed2001

Conflict behaviors toward same-sex and opposite-sex peers among male and female late adolescents.

Differences between males and females in regard to conflict behaviors toward same-sex and opposite-sex peers were examined in a sample of 501 undergraduate university students (326 males, 175 females). They completed a one-page questionnaire containing the theoretical definitions of five conflict behaviors identified by Thomas (1976): competing, avoiding, accommodating, compromising, and collaborating. Students were asked to rate the extent to which they exhibit each of these conflict behaviors, on a 5-point Likert-type scale, separately for same-sex and opposite-sex peers. Results revealed that males reported more competing behavior toward same-sex peers than toward opposite-sex peers, and more avoiding behavior toward opposite-sex peers than toward same-sex peers. Males, compared to females, reported more accommodating behavior toward both same-sex and opposite-sex peers. These findings support the view that preferences regarding conflict behaviors are different for males and females, particularly as exhibited toward same-sex and opposite-sex peers.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

Using a 'peer assessment questionnaire' in primary medical care.

BACKGROUND: Periodic assessment of clinician performance or 'revalidation' is being actively considered to reassure the public that doctors are 'up to date and fit to practice'. There is, therefore, increasing interest in how to assess individual clinician performance in a valid and reliable way. The use of peer assessment questionnaires is one of the methods being considered and investigated by the General Medical Council in the UK. AIM: To test the feasibility of using a peer assessment questionnaire in a primary care setting, and consider the related issues of validity and reliability and compare the results to previous studies. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey in a volunteer sample. SETTING: General practice in the UK. METHOD: GPs who volunteered to take part in an evaluation of a pilot appraisal implementation scheme were recruited by appraisers. These volunteers (GP subjects) chose 15 colleagues to complete a 'peer assessment' questionnaire that asked peers to make judgements about their clinical skills and other characteristics, such as 'compassion', 'integrity' and 'responsibility'. RESULTS: Of the 207 practitioners that agreed to be appraised, 113 completed the optional task of implementing the peer questionnaire. Of the 1271 raters, 1189 provided data about their roles and 33.6% of these were GPs. The data revealed significant levels of items where peers were 'unable to evaluate' the issues posed in the questionnaire (ranging from 13.7-1.8%). These rates differed from those obtained in studies based in the US where mean scores were slightly higher. Although the overall results are broadly similar to those previously obtained, there are sufficient differences to suggest that there are contextual issues influencing the interpretation of the items and therefore the scoring process. CONCLUSION: The volunteer sample in this study found no major obstacles to the implementation of the peer assessment questionnaire. While it is not possible to generalise from this selected volunteer sample, the use of peer assessment questionnaires appears feasible and may be acceptable to clinical practitioners. However, concern remains about the validity of such instruments and that their development did not fully consider issues of procedural justice or whether the overall purpose of the tools was to be formative, summative, or both.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed1989

Ratings of surgical residents by self, supervisors and peers.

Ratings by self, supervisors and peers of surgical residents were compared and contrasted, and the correlation between these ratings and the scores on the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) were studied. In addition, comparisons were made between ratings by residents of their peers (n = 32) and of attending surgeons (n = 61) with whom they had worked. The ratings consisted of scores from 1 to 5 in each of ten areas of clinical competence. Results indicated that over-all ratings by peers and supervisors were highly intercorrelated (r = 0.92; p less than 0.001) and that the average of over-all ratings by peers and supervisors correlated moderately with the total raw score on ABSITE (r = 0.58; p less than 0.01). Factor analyses suggested that the dimensions underlying the three sets of ratings differed considerably. It appeared that ratings by supervisors were influenced primarily by the interpersonal skills of the residents and secondarily by ability. In contrast, self-ratings by the residents were apparently mainly influenced by their perceptions of their own ability, followed by interpersonal skills and effort. Ratings by peers, on the other hand, seemed to reflect the over-all impression of the peers of the resident being rated. Comparisons between ratings of peers and attending surgeons by residents revealed that residents view attending surgeons as having a more balanced level of competence, across areas of both ability and interpersonal skills. Ratings of peers were lower than were the ratings of attending physicians by the residents in the areas of technical ability, knowledge of basic science and clinical knowledge.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Analysis of Variance↗

PubMed1987

Similarity as a factor effecting change in children's attitudes toward mentally retarded peers.

How children's attitudes toward mentally retarded and nonretarded peers were affected by information highlighting the similarities and differences of those peers was assessed. Eighty fourth- through sixth-grade children viewed either a nonretarded, mildly retarded, or moderately retarded target child in two videotape vignettes. The first showed a target who was reading; the second, a target discussing interests. Children's attitudes and perceived similarity to the target were assessed. Results showed that children judged nonretarded peers more favorably than retarded peers, information about target peers' interests positively affected children's attitudes, children were able to see themselves as similar to retarded target peers, and children who saw themselves as similar to the target peer evaluated that peer more positively than children who did not perceive themselves as similar.

Attitude↗

PubMed1987

Effects of mentally retarded children's behavioral competence on nonretarded peers' behaviors and attitudes: toward establishing ecological validity in attitude research.

This study was designed to begin establishing the ecological validity of laboratory research indicating that nonretarded children's responses toward mentally retarded peers are positively affected by the retarded peers' competence in different areas. Groups of 3 children (1 retarded and 2 nonretarded fourth through sixth-graders) played a bean bag toss game in which the retarded child was either the best or an average player. Then children selected one of their two partners as a partner for a subsequent game and indicated their attitudes toward each peer and their attribution for each peer's performance. Retarded children who were the best players were selected as partners significantly more often than retarded children who were average players. Nonretarded children's attitudes toward retarded peers, however, were the same regardless of the retarded peers' performance. A relationship was also found between children's attributions of retarded peers' success to ability and their selection of the same peers as partners.

Aptitude↗

PubMed1997

Peer intervention in case management practice.

Using peers as case managers in dealing with current and chronic public health problems such as substance abuse, gang violence, or the HIV/AIDS crisis has been shown to improve outreach efforts, monitoring, and outcomes in hard-to-reach populations. This article focuses on a case management strategy that uses peer modeling interventions to assist people in renegotiating their present life circumstances. Peer modeling engages peers of the client population as case managers and employs group-mediated, social control intervention strategies in the community to bring about positive changes in lifestyle and living conditions. The peer approach is an enhanced version of case management, utilizing the core activities of outreach, assessment, planning, linking, monitoring, and advocacy but adding peer-led, skill-based training activities, coupled with a system of positive incentives designed to encourage a more healthful lifestyle. To clarify this enhanced approach to case management, the authors present a matrix to illustrate how key case management activities might be enhanced through peer modeling interventions. We conclude by suggesting the circumstances in which an organization responsible for service delivery might consider using peer modeling in addressing difficult public health problems, and we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of such a strategy.

Case Management↗