Resource: A case for revisiting peer review: Implications for professional self-regulation and quality improvement

By: Terry E. Hill, Peter F. Martelli & Julie H. Kuo

June 28, 2015

PlosOne

Quality improvement in healthcare has often been promoted as different from and more valuable than peer review and other professional self-regulation processes. In spite of attempts to harmonize these two approaches, the perception of dichotomous opposition has persisted. A sequence of events in the troubled California prison system fortuitously isolated workforce interventions from more typical quality improvement interventions. Our objectives were to (1) evaluate the relative contributions of professional accountability and quality improvement interventions to an observed decrease in population mortality and (2) explore the organizational dynamics that potentiated positive outcomes.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0199961

Resource Type(s):

Articles that use the Clearinghouse

Citation: 13 PLoS One 1-20

Related Cases:

Plata v. Newsom