View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The General Medical Council’s Performance Procedures: peer review of performance in the workplace.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The General Medical Council’s Performance Procedures: peer review of performance in the workplace.
Authors: Southgate, Lesley (AUTHOR), Cox, Jim (AUTHOR), David, Timothy (AUTHOR), Hatch, David (AUTHOR), Howes, Alan (AUTHOR), Johnson, Neil (AUTHOR), Jolly, Brian (AUTHOR), Macdonald, Ewan (AUTHOR), McAvoy, Pauline (AUTHOR), McCrorie, Peter (AUTHOR), Turner, Joanne (AUTHOR)
Source: Medical Education. Dec2001 Supplement 1, Vol. 35, p9-19. 11p.
Subjects: Rating of physicians, Professional peer review
Abstract: The General Medical Council procedures to assess the performance of doctors who may be seriously deficient include peer review of the doctor’s practice at the workplace and tests of competence and skills. Peer reviews are conducted by three trained assessors, two from the same speciality as the doctor being assessed, with one lay assessor. The doctor completes a portfolio to describe his/her training, experience, the circumstances of practice and self rate his/her competence and familiarity in dealing with the common problems of his/her own discipline. The assessment includes a review of the doctor’s medical records; discussion of cases selected from these records; observation of consultations for clinicians, or of relevant activities in non-clinicians; a tour of the doctor’s workplace; interviews with at least 12 third parties (five nominated by the doctor); and structured interviews with the doctor. The content and structure of the peer review are designed to assess the doctor against the standards defined in Good Medical Practice, as applied to the doctor’s speciality. The assessment methods are based on validated instruments and gather 700–1000 judgements on each doctor. Early experience of the peer review visits has confirmed their feasibility and effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 5606717
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The General Medical Council’s Performance Procedures: peer review of performance in the workplace.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Southgate%2C+Lesley%22">Southgate, Lesley</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cox%2C+Jim%22">Cox, Jim</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22David%2C+Timothy%22">David, Timothy</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hatch%2C+David%22">Hatch, David</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Howes%2C+Alan%22">Howes, Alan</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Johnson%2C+Neil%22">Johnson, Neil</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jolly%2C+Brian%22">Jolly, Brian</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Macdonald%2C+Ewan%22">Macdonald, Ewan</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McAvoy%2C+Pauline%22">McAvoy, Pauline</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McCrorie%2C+Peter%22">McCrorie, Peter</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Turner%2C+Joanne%22">Turner, Joanne</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Medical+Education%22">Medical Education</searchLink>. Dec2001 Supplement 1, Vol. 35, p9-19. 11p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Rating+of+physicians%22">Rating of physicians</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professional+peer+review%22">Professional peer review</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The General Medical Council procedures to assess the performance of doctors who may be seriously deficient include peer review of the doctor’s practice at the workplace and tests of competence and skills. Peer reviews are conducted by three trained assessors, two from the same speciality as the doctor being assessed, with one lay assessor. The doctor completes a portfolio to describe his/her training, experience, the circumstances of practice and self rate his/her competence and familiarity in dealing with the common problems of his/her own discipline. The assessment includes a review of the doctor’s medical records; discussion of cases selected from these records; observation of consultations for clinicians, or of relevant activities in non-clinicians; a tour of the doctor’s workplace; interviews with at least 12 third parties (five nominated by the doctor); and structured interviews with the doctor. The content and structure of the peer review are designed to assess the doctor against the standards defined in Good Medical Practice, as applied to the doctor’s speciality. The assessment methods are based on validated instruments and gather 700–1000 judgements on each doctor. Early experience of the peer review visits has confirmed their feasibility and effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=5606717
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.00002.x
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 11
        StartPage: 9
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Rating of physicians
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professional peer review
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The General Medical Council’s Performance Procedures: peer review of performance in the workplace.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Southgate, Lesley
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cox, Jim
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: David, Timothy
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hatch, David
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Howes, Alan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Johnson, Neil
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jolly, Brian
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Macdonald, Ewan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McAvoy, Pauline
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McCrorie, Peter
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Turner, Joanne
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 02
              M: 12
              Text: Dec2001 Supplement 1
              Type: published
              Y: 2001
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 03080110
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 35
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Medical Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1