Suppr超能文献

通过智能自动化重新定义同行评审实践 第 1 部分:创建标准化方法和可参考数据库。

Redefining the Practice of Peer Review Through Intelligent Automation Part 1: Creation of a Standardized Methodology and Referenceable Database.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Veterans Affairs Maryland Healthcare System, 10 North Greene Street, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.

出版信息

J Digit Imaging. 2017 Oct;30(5):530-533. doi: 10.1007/s10278-017-0004-4.

Abstract

Conventional peer review practice is compromised by a number of well-documented biases, which in turn limit standard of care analysis, which is fundamental to determination of medical malpractice. In addition to these intrinsic biases, other existing deficiencies exist in current peer review including the lack of standardization, objectivity, retrospective practice, and automation. An alternative model to address these deficiencies would be one which is completely blinded to the peer reviewer, requires independent reporting from both parties, utilizes automated data mining techniques for neutral and objective report analysis, and provides data reconciliation for resolution of finding-specific report differences. If properly implemented, this peer review model could result in creation of a standardized referenceable peer review database which could further assist in customizable education, technology refinement, and implementation of real-time context and user-specific decision support.

摘要

传统的同行评审实践受到多种有据可查的偏见的影响,这些偏见反过来又限制了标准护理分析,而标准护理分析是确定医疗事故的基础。除了这些内在的偏见之外,当前的同行评审还存在其他缺陷,包括缺乏标准化、客观性、回顾性实践和自动化。解决这些缺陷的一种替代模式是完全对同行评审员视而不见,要求双方独立报告,利用自动化数据挖掘技术进行中立和客观的报告分析,并提供数据协调以解决特定发现的报告差异。如果正确实施,这种同行评审模式可以创建一个标准化的可参考的同行评审数据库,从而进一步有助于定制化教育、技术改进以及实时上下文和用户特定决策支持的实施。

相似文献

4
Medical imaging data reconciliation, part 4: Reconciliation of radiology reports and clinical outcomes data.
J Am Coll Radiol. 2011 Dec;8(12):858-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2011.06.015.
7
Quality assurance in radiology: peer review and peer feedback.
Clin Radiol. 2015 Nov;70(11):1158-64. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2015.06.091. Epub 2015 Jul 26.
8
Redefining the Medical Standard of Care: Event-Specific Workflow Analysis.
J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 Sep;14(9):1177-1179. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.02.024. Epub 2017 May 3.
9
Medical imaging data reconciliation, part 3: reconciliation of historical and current radiology report data.
J Am Coll Radiol. 2011 Nov;8(11):768-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2011.04.021.
10
Customization of medical report data.
J Digit Imaging. 2010 Aug;23(4):363-73. doi: 10.1007/s10278-010-9307-4.

本文引用的文献

1
Expert witness blinding strategies to mitigate bias in radiology malpractice cases: a comprehensive review of the literature.
J Am Coll Radiol. 2014 Sep;11(9):868-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.05.001. Epub 2014 Jul 16.
2
Peer review in clinical radiology practice.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Aug;199(2):W158-62. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.8143.
4
Current perspectives in medical image perception.
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010 Jul;72(5):1205-17. doi: 10.3758/APP.72.5.1205.
5
Impact of hindsight bias on interpretation of nonenhanced computed tomographic head scans for acute stroke.
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010 Mar-Apr;34(2):229-32. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181c21f72.
6
What does the medical profession mean by "standard of care?".
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 10;27(32):e192-3. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.24.6678. Epub 2009 Sep 21.
7
Peer review in diagnostic radiology: current state and a vision for the future.
Radiographics. 2009 Sep-Oct;29(5):1221-31. doi: 10.1148/rg.295095086. Epub 2009 Jun 29.
8
Juries and medical malpractice claims: empirical facts versus myths.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Feb;467(2):367-75. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0608-6. Epub 2008 Nov 11.
9
Outcome bias.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004 Sep;183(3):557-60. doi: 10.2214/ajr.183.3.1830557.
10
Hindsight bias.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Sep;175(3):597-601. doi: 10.2214/ajr.175.3.1750597.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验