同行评议对新生儿听力筛查项目转诊报告的听觉脑干反应阈值准确性的影响

Sudhagar Kuttva, P. Radomskij, E. Raglan
{"title":"同行评议对新生儿听力筛查项目转诊报告的听觉脑干反应阈值准确性的影响","authors":"Sudhagar Kuttva, P. Radomskij, E. Raglan","doi":"10.3109/16513860903374646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective: The aim of this study was to establish the impact of peer review on estimated ABR thresholds. Study design: The reported ABR thresholds of two groups of 38 babies tested over a period of six months when a system of formal peer review was in place, and another period of six months when it was not in place, were retrospectively analysed by expert clinicians. Results: The modal differences between experts and tester estimated threshold with and without peer review were 5dB (-10 to +20) and 0dB (-10 to +35), respectively. Wilcoxon's signed-rank test for paired samples revealed a small but significant difference in estimated thresholds between experts and tester irrespective of whether tester was subjected to peer review on the day of the test or not. Conclusion: Peer review provides opportunities for peer support and continuing professional development. A system of formal peer review is strongly advocated.","PeriodicalId":88223,"journal":{"name":"Audiological medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":"205 - 210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of peer review on accuracy of reported auditory brainstem response thresholds in newborn hearing screening programme referrals\",\"authors\":\"Sudhagar Kuttva, P. Radomskij, E. Raglan\",\"doi\":\"10.3109/16513860903374646\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective: The aim of this study was to establish the impact of peer review on estimated ABR thresholds. Study design: The reported ABR thresholds of two groups of 38 babies tested over a period of six months when a system of formal peer review was in place, and another period of six months when it was not in place, were retrospectively analysed by expert clinicians. Results: The modal differences between experts and tester estimated threshold with and without peer review were 5dB (-10 to +20) and 0dB (-10 to +35), respectively. Wilcoxon's signed-rank test for paired samples revealed a small but significant difference in estimated thresholds between experts and tester irrespective of whether tester was subjected to peer review on the day of the test or not. Conclusion: Peer review provides opportunities for peer support and continuing professional development. A system of formal peer review is strongly advocated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":88223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Audiological medicine\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"205 - 210\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Audiological medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3109/16513860903374646\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiological medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/16513860903374646","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要目的:本研究旨在探讨同行评议对ABR阈值的影响。研究设计:临床专家对两组38名婴儿的ABR阈值进行了回顾性分析,这两组婴儿分别在有正式同行评议制度的6个月期间和没有正式同行评议制度的6个月期间接受了测试。结果:专家和测试人员估计阈值在同行评审和不同行评审下的模态差异分别为5dB(-10至+20)和0dB(-10至+35)。配对样本的Wilcoxon's sign -rank检验显示,无论测试人员在测试当天是否接受同行评审,专家和测试人员之间的估计阈值都有很小但显著的差异。结论:同行评议提供了同行支持和持续专业发展的机会。一种正式的同行评议制度被强烈提倡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of peer review on accuracy of reported auditory brainstem response thresholds in newborn hearing screening programme referrals
Abstract Objective: The aim of this study was to establish the impact of peer review on estimated ABR thresholds. Study design: The reported ABR thresholds of two groups of 38 babies tested over a period of six months when a system of formal peer review was in place, and another period of six months when it was not in place, were retrospectively analysed by expert clinicians. Results: The modal differences between experts and tester estimated threshold with and without peer review were 5dB (-10 to +20) and 0dB (-10 to +35), respectively. Wilcoxon's signed-rank test for paired samples revealed a small but significant difference in estimated thresholds between experts and tester irrespective of whether tester was subjected to peer review on the day of the test or not. Conclusion: Peer review provides opportunities for peer support and continuing professional development. A system of formal peer review is strongly advocated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信