Peer Review: Innovating Change

Salud, Antonio; Shapiro, David S.; Rampulla, Tom; Reddin, Karen

doi:10.7812/tpp/11-108

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Recommended Changes To the Peer Review Process1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2015

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conducting a peer review systematically and leveraging people who care about the process will have a profound effect on the success of the program. The use of a five-step process helps ensure the integrity of the peer review program: 30 Identifying a reason for the reviewConducting the reviewReaching a consensusCreating an action planImproving performance.…”

Section: Recommended Changes To the Peer Review Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Review and Surgical Innovation: Robotic Surgery and Its Hurdles

Vyas

Cronin

2015

Amer J Robot Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The peer review processes as outlined in the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) is meant ensure quality standard of care through a self-policing mechanism by the medical community. This process grants immunity for people filing a peer review, which is meant to protect whistleblowers. However, it also creates a loophole that can be used maliciously to hinder competition. This is accentuated when surgeons are integrating new technologies, such as robotic surgery, into their practice. With more than 2000 da Vinci robots in use and more than 300 new units being shipped each year, robotic surgery has become a mainstay in the surgical field. The applications for robots continue to expand as surgeons discover their expanding capability. We need a better peer review process. That ensures the peer review is void of competitive bias. Peer reviewers need to be familiar with the procedure and the technology. The current process could stymie innovation in the name of competition.

show abstract