• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

专业自我监管:同行评审

Professional self-regulation: peer review.

作者信息

DiAngelis A J, Speidel T M

出版信息

Dent Clin North Am. 1985 Jul;29(3):437-47.

PMID:3861389
Abstract

Dentistry, in fulfilling its responsibility for self-regulation, has established a highly specific and formalized method of peer review. Its primary purpose is to mediate problems between patients, dentists, and third parties relative to the quality of treatment and appropriateness of care. It is a confidential service provided to the public and profession at no cost and accomplished with the voluntary cooperation of all parties involved. Decisions of peer review committees are advisory in nature but offer an alternative to legal resolution of misunderstandings and problems in patient care. The profession, by continually refining peer review and by educating its members and the public to its function, is providing a unique and valuable service to patients, dentists, and third parties. The objective and consistent application of this self-monitoring process is but one mechanism by which dentistry seeks to serve the public and perpetuate its high standard of care.

摘要

牙科在履行自我监管职责时,建立了一种高度具体且形式化的同行评审方法。其主要目的是调解患者、牙医和第三方之间有关治疗质量和护理适宜性的问题。它是一项免费向公众和行业提供的保密服务,通过所有相关方的自愿合作来完成。同行评审委员会的决定本质上是咨询性的,但为患者护理中误解和问题的法律解决提供了一种替代方案。该行业通过不断完善同行评审,并向其成员和公众宣传其功能,正在为患者、牙医和第三方提供一项独特而有价值的服务。这种自我监督过程的客观和一致应用只是牙科寻求服务公众并维持其高标准护理的一种机制。

相似文献

1
Professional self-regulation: peer review.专业自我监管:同行评审
Dent Clin North Am. 1985 Jul;29(3):437-47.
2
Providers question PROs' effectiveness. Critics contend peer review organizations are too costly and fail to improve the quality of care.医疗服务提供者质疑专业评审组织的有效性。批评者认为,同行评审组织成本过高,且未能提高医疗质量。
Health Prog. 1992 Jul-Aug;73(6):28-32, 38.
3
The professional practice climate and peer review.
Nursingconnections. 1989 Spring;2(1):47-54.
4
Perspective of the third parties.
Dent Clin North Am. 1985 Jul;29(3):507-19.
5
An innovative approach to peer review for the advanced practice nurse--a focus on critical incidents.
J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2008 Jul;20(7):376-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2008.00335.x.
6
Utilization and quality control peer review organizations--a rose by any other name . . . ?利用情况和质量控制同行评审组织——换个名字还是玫瑰……?
J Med Assoc Ga. 1982 Nov;71(11):793-6.
7
Quality assurance in the provision of hospital care. Trustees: the ultimate responsibility.医院护理服务中的质量保证。受托人:最终责任。
Hospitals. 1974 Mar 1;48(5):63 passim.
8
Policy versus practice: comparison of prescribing therapy and durable medical equipment in medical and educational settings.政策与实践:医疗和教育环境中处方治疗与耐用医疗设备的比较
Pediatrics. 2004 Nov;114(5):e612-25. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1063.
9
Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.德国药品效益评估的程序和方法。
Eur J Health Econ. 2008 Nov;9 Suppl 1:5-29. doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0122-5.
10
MMA peer review program to monitor quality of care.
Minn Med. 1993 Apr;76(4):31-3.