These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Ring trials in expert assessment--a practicable procedure for quality assurance?].
    Author: Lederer P, Weber A, Strebl H, Schmid K.
    Journal: Gesundheitswesen; 1996 Mar; 58(3):169-72. PubMed ID: 8645902.
    Abstract:
    An intercomparison programme for expert assessment was carried out as part of quality assurance for the public health departments in Bavaria. A file documenting medical diagnoses and reports of a patient was presented to medical doctors in a district of Bavaria and in the Academy for Public Health Services in Munich for assessment. The participation was voluntary and anonymous. The case presented was an obese man who wanted to become a civil servant. The doctors were asked to give an expert assessment of his health. Four criteria were used to evaluate the assessments: the assessment, its conclusiveness, the documentation and the epicrisis. 54 out of 100 doctors asked participated. On average all criteria were adequately fulfilled. This paper discusses the advantages and disadvantages of an intercomparison programme for expert assessments in the field of social medicine. Our results show that an intercomparison programme for expert assessments could form part of quality assurance.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]