Peer review interrater concordance of scientific abstracts: a study of anesthesiology subspecialty and component societies.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 16632833.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Abstracts presented at anesthesiology subspeciality and component society meetings are chosen by peer review. We assessed this process by examining selection criteria and determining interrater concordance. For the societies studied, the level of reviewer agreement ranged from poor to moderate, i.e., slightly better than by chance alone. We hypothesize that having clearer evaluation criteria, scoring systems with interval scales, and assessment based on quality can strengthen the peer review process.
Medical subject headings
- Anesthesiology
- Peer Review
- Societies, Medical