BMJ  2004;329:171 (17 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7458.171

Letter

Review of instruments for peer assessment of physicians

Clinics with peers keep you on the straight and narrow...

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—Evans et al raise several points in their article reviewing methods of peer assessment.1

Firstly, joint clinics are excellent for observing colleagues—and being observed by them—in genuine clinical situations. I regularly hold joint clinics with colleagues from overlapping specialties, such as genetics, neurology, ophthalmology, etc. I learn new ways of communicating with patients and families: opening the consultation, giving explanations and (bad) news. Opportunities exist to question colleagues at the time of the consultation—for example, why are you doing or not doing an investigation? It is non-threatening, constructive, and leads to reflective discussion.

Secondly, 360 degree appraisals are popular but have not been validated.2 Any doctor worth their salt will challenge the status quo. We should ask difficult questions of ourselves (especially), colleagues, other health professionals, administrators, and sometimes patients and parents. Fear of getting poor reports will mean that either the appraisal forms are given to those . . . [Full text of this article]

Charles Essex, consultant neurodevelopmental paediatrician

Child Development Unit, Gulson Hospital, Coventry CV1 2HR Room101@ntworld.com


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Review of instruments for peer assessment of physicians
Richard Evans, Glyn Elwyn, and Adrian Edwards
BMJ 2004 328: 1240. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ