Use of Peer Ratings to Evaluate Physician Performance

Paul G. Ramsey, Marjorie D. Wenrich, Jan D. Carline, Thomas Inui, Eric B. Larson, James P. LoGerfo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

308 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. —To assess the feasibility and measurement characteristics of ratings completed by professional associates to evaluate the performance of practicing physicians. Design. —The clinical performance of physicians was evaluated using written questionnaires mailed to professional associates (physicians and nurses). Physician-associates were randomly selected from lists provided by both the subjects and medical supervisors, and detailed information was collected concerning the professional and social relationships between the associate and the subject. Responses were analyzed to determine factors that affect ratings and measurement characteristics of peer ratings. Setting and Participants. —Physician-subjects were selected from among practicing internists in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania who received American Board of Internal Medicine certification 5 to 15 years previously. Main Outcome Measure. —Physician performance as assessed by peers. Results. —Peer ratings are not biased substantially by the method of selection of the peers or the relationship between the rater and the subject. Factor analyses suggest a two-dimensional conceptualization of clinical skills: one factor represents cognitive and clinical management skills and the other factor represents humanistic qualities and management of psychosocial aspects of illness. Ratings from 11 peer physicians are needed to provide a reliable assessment in these two areas. Conclusions. —These findings suggest that it is feasible to obtain assessments from professional associates of practicing physicians in areas such as clinical skills, humanistic qualities, and communication skills. Using a shorter version of the questionnaire used in this study, peer ratings provide a practical method to assess clinical performance in areas such as humanistic qualities and communication skills that are difficult to assess with other measures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1655-1660
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of the American Medical Association
Volume269
Issue number13
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 7 1993
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Physicians
Clinical Competence
Communication
Certification
Internal Medicine
Statistical Factor Analysis
Nurses
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Ramsey, P. G., Wenrich, M. D., Carline, J. D., Inui, T., Larson, E. B., & LoGerfo, J. P. (1993). Use of Peer Ratings to Evaluate Physician Performance. Journal of the American Medical Association, 269(13), 1655-1660. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1993.03500130069034

Use of Peer Ratings to Evaluate Physician Performance. / Ramsey, Paul G.; Wenrich, Marjorie D.; Carline, Jan D.; Inui, Thomas; Larson, Eric B.; LoGerfo, James P.

In: Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 269, No. 13, 07.04.1993, p. 1655-1660.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ramsey, PG, Wenrich, MD, Carline, JD, Inui, T, Larson, EB & LoGerfo, JP 1993, 'Use of Peer Ratings to Evaluate Physician Performance', Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 269, no. 13, pp. 1655-1660. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1993.03500130069034
Ramsey, Paul G. ; Wenrich, Marjorie D. ; Carline, Jan D. ; Inui, Thomas ; Larson, Eric B. ; LoGerfo, James P. / Use of Peer Ratings to Evaluate Physician Performance. In: Journal of the American Medical Association. 1993 ; Vol. 269, No. 13. pp. 1655-1660.
@article{7ffb03e8d1a44c42821c6e9a7f8e58bb,
title = "Use of Peer Ratings to Evaluate Physician Performance",
abstract = "Objective. —To assess the feasibility and measurement characteristics of ratings completed by professional associates to evaluate the performance of practicing physicians. Design. —The clinical performance of physicians was evaluated using written questionnaires mailed to professional associates (physicians and nurses). Physician-associates were randomly selected from lists provided by both the subjects and medical supervisors, and detailed information was collected concerning the professional and social relationships between the associate and the subject. Responses were analyzed to determine factors that affect ratings and measurement characteristics of peer ratings. Setting and Participants. —Physician-subjects were selected from among practicing internists in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania who received American Board of Internal Medicine certification 5 to 15 years previously. Main Outcome Measure. —Physician performance as assessed by peers. Results. —Peer ratings are not biased substantially by the method of selection of the peers or the relationship between the rater and the subject. Factor analyses suggest a two-dimensional conceptualization of clinical skills: one factor represents cognitive and clinical management skills and the other factor represents humanistic qualities and management of psychosocial aspects of illness. Ratings from 11 peer physicians are needed to provide a reliable assessment in these two areas. Conclusions. —These findings suggest that it is feasible to obtain assessments from professional associates of practicing physicians in areas such as clinical skills, humanistic qualities, and communication skills. Using a shorter version of the questionnaire used in this study, peer ratings provide a practical method to assess clinical performance in areas such as humanistic qualities and communication skills that are difficult to assess with other measures.",
author = "Ramsey, {Paul G.} and Wenrich, {Marjorie D.} and Carline, {Jan D.} and Thomas Inui and Larson, {Eric B.} and LoGerfo, {James P.}",
year = "1993",
month = "4",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1001/jama.1993.03500130069034",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "269",
pages = "1655--1660",
journal = "JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association",
issn = "0002-9955",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "13",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of Peer Ratings to Evaluate Physician Performance

AU - Ramsey, Paul G.

AU - Wenrich, Marjorie D.

AU - Carline, Jan D.

AU - Inui, Thomas

AU - Larson, Eric B.

AU - LoGerfo, James P.

PY - 1993/4/7

Y1 - 1993/4/7

N2 - Objective. —To assess the feasibility and measurement characteristics of ratings completed by professional associates to evaluate the performance of practicing physicians. Design. —The clinical performance of physicians was evaluated using written questionnaires mailed to professional associates (physicians and nurses). Physician-associates were randomly selected from lists provided by both the subjects and medical supervisors, and detailed information was collected concerning the professional and social relationships between the associate and the subject. Responses were analyzed to determine factors that affect ratings and measurement characteristics of peer ratings. Setting and Participants. —Physician-subjects were selected from among practicing internists in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania who received American Board of Internal Medicine certification 5 to 15 years previously. Main Outcome Measure. —Physician performance as assessed by peers. Results. —Peer ratings are not biased substantially by the method of selection of the peers or the relationship between the rater and the subject. Factor analyses suggest a two-dimensional conceptualization of clinical skills: one factor represents cognitive and clinical management skills and the other factor represents humanistic qualities and management of psychosocial aspects of illness. Ratings from 11 peer physicians are needed to provide a reliable assessment in these two areas. Conclusions. —These findings suggest that it is feasible to obtain assessments from professional associates of practicing physicians in areas such as clinical skills, humanistic qualities, and communication skills. Using a shorter version of the questionnaire used in this study, peer ratings provide a practical method to assess clinical performance in areas such as humanistic qualities and communication skills that are difficult to assess with other measures.

AB - Objective. —To assess the feasibility and measurement characteristics of ratings completed by professional associates to evaluate the performance of practicing physicians. Design. —The clinical performance of physicians was evaluated using written questionnaires mailed to professional associates (physicians and nurses). Physician-associates were randomly selected from lists provided by both the subjects and medical supervisors, and detailed information was collected concerning the professional and social relationships between the associate and the subject. Responses were analyzed to determine factors that affect ratings and measurement characteristics of peer ratings. Setting and Participants. —Physician-subjects were selected from among practicing internists in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania who received American Board of Internal Medicine certification 5 to 15 years previously. Main Outcome Measure. —Physician performance as assessed by peers. Results. —Peer ratings are not biased substantially by the method of selection of the peers or the relationship between the rater and the subject. Factor analyses suggest a two-dimensional conceptualization of clinical skills: one factor represents cognitive and clinical management skills and the other factor represents humanistic qualities and management of psychosocial aspects of illness. Ratings from 11 peer physicians are needed to provide a reliable assessment in these two areas. Conclusions. —These findings suggest that it is feasible to obtain assessments from professional associates of practicing physicians in areas such as clinical skills, humanistic qualities, and communication skills. Using a shorter version of the questionnaire used in this study, peer ratings provide a practical method to assess clinical performance in areas such as humanistic qualities and communication skills that are difficult to assess with other measures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027476569&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027476569&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jama.1993.03500130069034

DO - 10.1001/jama.1993.03500130069034

M3 - Article

C2 - 8240483

AN - SCOPUS:0027476569

VL - 269

SP - 1655

EP - 1660

JO - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

JF - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

SN - 0002-9955

IS - 13

ER -