This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cohen, I. T. Articles by Patel, K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cohen, I. T. Articles by Patel, K. Related Collections Economics and Health Care Research

---

ECONOMICS, EDUCATION, AND HEALTH SYSTEMS RESEARCH

Peer Review Interrater Concordance of Scientific Abstracts: A Study of Anesthesiology Subspecialty and Component Societies

Department of Anesthesiology and Pediatrics, Children’s National Medical Center, George Washington University, Washington, DC

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Ira Todd Cohen, MD, Children’s National Medical Center, 111 Michigan Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20010. Address e-mail to icohen{at}cnmc.org.

Abstracts presented at anesthesiology subspeciality and component society meetings are chosen by peer review. We assessed this process by examining selection criteria and determining interrater concordance. For the societies studied, the level of reviewer agreement ranged from poor to moderate, i.e., slightly better than by chance alone. We hypothesize that having clearer evaluation criteria, scoring systems with interval scales, and assessment based on quality can strengthen the peer review process.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Hopewell, A. Eisinga, and M. Clarke Better reporting of randomized trials in biomedical journal and conference abstracts Journal of Information Science, April 1, 2008; 34(2): 162 - 173. [Abstract] [PDF]