This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Anita D. Taylor, MAEd; Eric M. Wall, MD, MPH
Oregon Health Sciences University Portland

JAMA. 1990;264(24):3143-3144.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor. —

At many medical meetings, presentations are evaluated by the participants, who judge their quality and appropriateness. Feedback is then provided to the presenters. There is, however, nothing in the medical, scientific, or even education literature comparing this audience evaluation of an actual presentation with the reviewer's evaluation of the submitted paper. Is peer review worth the effort it takes by both program planners and reviewers?

Study. —

A "Call for Papers" was sent to 469 family medicine educators in March 1988 for the Eighth Annual Rocky Mountain and Western Regional Meeting of the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine. All who received the "Call for Papers" were solicited to be reviewers; 26 individuals offered to participate in this capacity. Each paper was reviewed in a blinded fashion by two reviewers who were neither in the same geographic location as each other nor in the same institution . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?