Enhancing Communication Skills by Peer Review of Consultation Videos

Cameron, Niall; McMillan, Rhona

doi:10.1080/1475990x.2006.11493509

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consideration needs to be given to how peer review is facilitated so that group members feel safe enough to share examples of practice that they feel are suboptimal. 453 The requisite skills and knowledge also need to be available to the group, either from the facilitator or from within the group as a whole. 452 In our case, one member had previous training in group facilitation and communication skills and others had extensive experience of trial recruitment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving patients’ experience and outcome of total joint replacement: the RESTORE programme

Blom

Artz

Beswick

et al. 2016

Programme Grants Appl Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms PROGRAMME GRANTS FOR APPLIED RESEARCH VOLUME 4 ISSUE 12 AUGUST 2016 ISSN 2050 DOI 10.3310/pgfar04120Improving patients' experience and outcome of total joint replacement: the RESTORE programme Ashley W Blom, Neil Artz, Andrew D Beswick, Amanda Burston, Paul Dieppe, Karen T Elvers, Rachael Gooberman-Hill, Jeremy Horwood, Paul Jepson, Emma Johnson, Erik Lenguerrand, Elsa Marques, Sian Noble, Mark Pyke, Catherine Sackley, Gina Sands, Adrian Sayers, Victoria Wells and Vikki Wylde Improving patients' experience and outcome of total joint replacement: the RESTORE programme ISSN 2050-4330 (Online) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full PGfAR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/pgfar. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Programme Grants for Applied Research journalReports are published in Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the PGfAR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors. Programme Grants for Applied Research programmeThe Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 2006 to produce independent research findings that will have practical application for the benefit of patients and the NHS in the relatively near future. The Programme is managed by the NIHR Central Commissioning Facility (CCF) with strategic input from the Programme Director.The programme is a national response mode funding scheme that aims to provide evidence to improve health outcomes in England through promotion of health, prevention of ill health, and optimal disease management (including safety and quality), with particular emphasis on conditions causing significant disease burden.For more information about the PGfAR programme please visit the website: http://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding/programme-grants-forapplied-research.htm This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by PGfAR as project number RP-PG-0407-10070. The contractual start date was in December 2008. The final report began editorial review in September 2014 and was accepted for publication in August 2015. As the funder, the PGfAR programme agreed the research questions and study designs in advance with the investigators. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The PGfAR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accurac...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving patients’ experience and outcome of total joint replacement: the RESTORE programme

Blom

Artz

Beswick

et al. 2016

Programme Grants Appl Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The model involves the application of formative assessment instruments, 11,15,16 by trained GP peers to facilitate developmental feedback for participants. For audit and SEA submissions, two GP peers (from a group of 20) are allocated to independently review submitted reports, with a single reviewer used for videos of consultations (from a group of 20).…”

Section: Completion Of Core Appraisal Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[11][12][13][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] However, further evidence from a range of GP groups as to its overall utility is necessary to inform future development. 24,25 GP appraisers are a key group with important professional insights into the strengths and weakness of the appraisal system and how it may be enhanced.…”

Section: -13mentioning

confidence: 99%

Verifying appraisal evidence using feedback from trained peers: views and experiences of Scottish GP appraisers

et al. 2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Each nurse in the team benefitted from individual feedback and the opportunity to learn from other members of the team, which contributed to professional development in a way that was clearly recognized. Consideration needs to be given to how peer‐review is facilitated, so that group members feel safe enough to share examples of practice that they feel are sub‐optimal (Cameron & McMillan ). The requisite skills and knowledge also need to be available to the group, either from the facilitator or from the group as a whole (Rout & Roberts ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Peer‐review has been applied to skills training in a variety of circumstances (Rout & Roberts ) including the development of communication skills (Cameron & McMillan ). Peer‐review may be described as ‘an organised effort whereby people critically appraise, systematically assess, monitor, make judgements, determine their strengths and weakness and review the quality of their practice’ (Rout & Roberts p428).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of internal peer‐review to train nurses recruiting to a randomized controlled trial – Internal Peer‐review for Recruitment Training in Trials (InterPReTiT)

Mann

Delgado

Horwood

2013

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nurse-led peer-review can provide a forum to share communication strategies that will elicit and address participant concerns and obtain evidence of participant understanding prior to consent. Comparing practice can improve consistency and accuracy of trial information and facilitate identification of recruitment issues. Internal peer-review was well accepted and promoted team cohesion. Further evaluation is needed.

show abstract

Enhancing Communication Skills by Peer Review of Consultation Videos

Cited by 8 publications

References 2 publications

Improving patients’ experience and outcome of total joint replacement: the RESTORE programme

Improving patients’ experience and outcome of total joint replacement: the RESTORE programme

Verifying appraisal evidence using feedback from trained peers: views and experiences of Scottish GP appraisers

Evaluation of internal peer‐review to train nurses recruiting to a randomized controlled trial – Internal Peer‐review for Recruitment Training in Trials (InterPReTiT)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About