1. a basic component of a quality assurance program in which the results of health care given to a specific patient population are evaluated according to health-wellness outcome criteria established by peers of the professionals delivering the care. Peer review is focused on the patient and on the results of care given by a group of professionals rather than on individual professional practitioners. Review by peer groups is promoted by professional organizations as a means of maintaining standards of care. Retrospective review critically evaluates the results of work that has been completed; it is done for purposes of improving future practice. The source of data is medical records which document the full continuum of care provided and each patient's response to that care. Concurrent review takes place at the time the care is being given. It critically examines each patient's progress toward desired health-wellness outcomes. Sources of data for concurrent review are the patient's record and interview, observation, and inspection of the patient. A major advantage of concurrent review is that it provides the opportunity to improve care so that patients benefit from the review and recommended changes in ongoing care. 2. in the nursing interventions classification, a nursing intervention defined as the systematic evaluation of a peer's performance compared with professional standards of practice. 3. Evaluation of a manuscript or research proposal by professional colleagues.
Process of evaluating research proposals, manuscripts submitted for publication, and abstracts submitted for presentation at a scientific meeting, whereby these are judged for technical and scientific merit by other scientists in the same field.
an appraisal by professional coworkers of equal status of the way an individual health professional conducts practice, education, or research. The appraisal uses accepted standards as measures against which performance is weighed.