A Peer Review Quality Assurance Program in Drug Information

ABSTRACTThe development and implementation of a peer review quality assurance program for a drug information service is described. Eight drug information centres across Canada initially agreed to participate as peer reviewers. Criteria were developed to select drug information requests that would qualify for the program. Peer review responses were compared to the centre's response by a panel of four drug information pharmacists. Thirteen of 14 requests sent to peer reviewers were returned and there was agreement between the conclusions and recommendations provided in the responses by our drug information centre and the peer review pharmacist in 11 cases. Peer reviewer pharmacists tended to prepare more in depth responses. This represents the first report of a peer review quality assurance program for a drug information service.RÉSUMÉCet article décrit le développement et la mise en oeuvre d'un programme d'assurance de la qualité effectué par des pairs pour un service d'informations pharmacothérapeutiques. Huit centres d'informations pharmacothérapeutiques à travers le pays ont accepté de participer en tant qu'évaluateurs. Des critères ont été développés afin de choisit les demandes d'informations pharmacothérapeutiques se qualifiant pour le programme. Les réponses des évaluateurs ont été comparées à celles du centre par une équipe composée de quatre pharmaciens travaillant dans un centre d'information. Treize des quatorze demandes transmises aux évaluateurs ont été retournées et il fut noté que dans 11 cas les conclusions et les recommandations des réponses de notre centre d'informations pharmacothérapeutiques correspondaient à celles données par les pharmaciens évaluateurs. Les pharmaciens évaluateurs avaient tendance à fournir des réponses plus approfondies. Ceci représente le premier rapport d'un programme d'assurance de la qualité effectuée par des pairs pour un service· d'informations pharmacothérapeutiques

A systematic mixed studies review on Organizational Participatory Research: towards operational guidance

Abstract Background Organizational Participatory Research (OPR) seeks organizational learning and/or practice improvement. Previous systematic literature reviews described some OPR processes and outcomes, but the link between these processes and outcomes is unknown. We sought to identify and sequence the key processes of OPR taking place with and within healthcare organizations and the main outcomes to which they contribute, and to define ideal-types of OPR. Methods This article reports a participatory systematic mixed studies review with qualitative synthesis A specialized health librarian searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase Classic + Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, Social Work Abstracts and Business Source Complete, together with grey literature data bases were searched from inception to November 29, 2012. This search was updated using forward citation tracking up to June 2014. Reporting quality was appraised and unclear articles were excluded. Included studies clearly reported OPR where the main research related decisions were co-constructed among the academic and healthcare organization partners. Included studies were distilled into summaries of their OPR processes and outcomes, which were subsequently analysed using deductive and inductive thematic analysis. All summaries were analysed; that is, data analysis continued beyond saturation. Results Eighty-three studies were included from the 8873 records retrieved. Eight key OPR processes were identified. Four follow the phases of research: 1) form a work group and hold meetings, 2) collectively determine research objectives, 3) collectively analyse data, and 4) collectively interpret results and decide how to use them. Four are present throughout OPR: 1) communication, 2) relationships; 3) commitment; 4) collective reflection. These processes contribute to extra benefits at the individual and organizational levels. Four ideal-types of OPR were defined. Basic OPR consists of OPR processes leading to achieving the study objectives. This ideal-type and may be combined with any of the following three ideal-types: OPR resulting in random additional benefits for the individuals or organization involved, OPR spreading to other sectors of the organization and beyond, or OPR leading to subsequent initiatives. These results are illustrated with a novel conceptual model. Conclusion The model provides operational guidance to help OPR stakeholders collaboratively address organizational issues and achieve desired outcomes and more. Review registration As per PROSPERO inclusion criteria, this review is not registered

Circulaires et annexes (1840-1871)

[Acte. 1840-1871

Development and content validation of the information assessment method for patients and consumers.

BACKGROUND:Online consumer health information addresses health problems, self-care, disease prevention, and health care services and is intended for the general public. Using this information, people can improve their knowledge, participation in health decision-making, and health. However, there are no comprehensive instruments to evaluate the value of health information from a consumer perspective.OBJECTIVE:We collaborated with information providers to develop and validate the Information Assessment Method for all (IAM4all) that can be used to collect feedback from information consumers (including patients), and to enable a two-way knowledge translation between information providers and consumers. [...