- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Tierney, William M."
Now showing 1 - 10 of 26
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Assessing the impact of a primary care electronic medical record system in three Kenyan rural health centers(Oxford University Press, 2016-05) Tierney, William M.; Sidle, John E.; Diero, Lameck O.; Sudoi, Allan; Kiplagat, Jepchirchir; Macharia, Stephen; Shen, Changyu; Yeung, Ada; Were, Martin C.; Slaven, James E.; Wools-Kaloustian, Kara; Medicine, School of MedicineObjective: Efficient, effective health care requires rapid availability of patient information. We designed, implemented, and assessed the impact of a primary care electronic medical record (EMR) in three rural Kenyan health centers. Method: Local clinicians identified data required for primary care and public health reporting. We designed paper encounter forms to capture these data in adult medicine, pediatric, and antenatal clinics. Encounter form data were hand-entered into a new primary care module in an existing EMR serving onsite clinics serving patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Before subsequent visits, Summary Reports were printed containing selected patient data with reminders for needed HIV care. We assessed effects on patient flow and provider work with time-motion studies before implementation and two years later, and we surveyed providers' satisfaction with the EMR. Results: Between September 2008 and December 2011, 72 635 primary care patients were registered and 114 480 encounter forms were completed. During 2011, 32 193 unique patients visited primary care clinics, and encounter forms were completed for all visits. Of 1031 (3.2%) who were HIV-infected, 85% received HIV care. Patient clinic time increased from 37 to 81 min/visit after EMR implementation in one health center and 56 to 106 min/visit in the other. However, outpatient visits to both health centers increased by 85%. Three-quarters of increased time was spent waiting. Despite nearly doubling visits, there was no change in clinical officers' work patterns, but the nurses' and the clerks' patient care time decreased after EMR implementation. Providers were generally satisfied with the EMR but desired additional training. Conclusions: We successfully implemented a primary care EMR in three rural Kenyan health centers. Patient waiting time was dramatically lengthened while the nurses' and the clerks' patient care time decreased. Long-term use of EMRs in such settings will require changes in culture and workflow.Item Association Between Preadmission Acid Suppressive Medication Exposure and Severity of Illness in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19(Elsevier, 2021) Elmunzer, B. Joseph; Wolf, Bethany J.; Scheiman, James M.; Tierney, William M.; Taylor, Jason R.; North American Alliance for the Study of Digestive Manifestations of COVID-19; Community and Global Health, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public HealthItem Baseline Features and Reasons for Nonparticipation in the Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM) Study, a Colorectal Cancer Screening Trial(American Medical Association, 2023-07-03) Robertson, Douglas J.; Dominitz, Jason A.; Beed, Alexander; Boardman, Kathy D.; Del Curto, Barbara J.; Guarino, Peter D.; Imperiale, Thomas F.; LaCasse, Andrew; Larson, Meaghan F.; Gupta, Samir; Lieberman, David; Planeta, Beata; Shaukat, Aasma; Sultan, Shanaz; Menees, Stacy B.; Saini, Sameer D.; Schoenfeld, Philip; Goebel, Stephan; von Rosenvinge, Erik C.; Baffy, Gyorgy; Halasz, Ildiko; Pedrosa, Marcos C.; Kahng, Lyn Sue; Cassim, Riaz; Greer, Katarina B.; Kinnard, Margaret F.; Bhatt, Divya B.; Dunbar, Kerry B.; Harford, William V.; Mengshol, John A.; Olson, Jed E.; Patel, Swati G.; Antaki, Fadi; Fisher, Deborah A.; Sullivan, Brian A.; Lenza, Christopher; Prajapati, Devang N.; Wong, Helen; Beyth, Rebecca; Lieb, John G.; Manlolo, Joseph; Ona, Fernando V.; Cole, Rhonda A.; Khalaf, Natalia; Kahi, Charles J.; Kohli, Divyanshoo Rai; Rai, Tarun; Sharma, Prateek; Anastasiou, Jiannis; Hagedorn, Curt; Fernando, Ronald S.; Jackson, Christian S.; Jamal, M. Mazen; Lee, Robert H.; Merchant, Farrukh; May, Folasade P.; Pisegna, Joseph R.; Omer, Endashaw; Parajuli, Dipendra; Said, Adnan; Nguyen, Toan D.; Tombazzi, Claudio Ruben; Feldman, Paul A.; Jacob, Leslie; Koppelman, Rachel N.; Lehenbauer, Kyle P.; Desai, Deepak S.; Madhoun, Mohammad F.; Tierney, William M.; Ho, Minh Q.; Hockman, Heather J.; Lopez, Christopher; Carter Paulson, Emily; Tobi, Martin; Pinillos, Hugo L.; Young, Michele; Ho, Nancy C.; Mascarenhas, Ranjan; Promrat, Kirrichai; Mutha, Pritesh R.; Pandak, William M.; Shah, Tilak; Schubert, Mitchell; Pancotto, Frank S.; Gawron, Andrew J.; Underwood, Amelia E.; Ho, Samuel B.; Magno-Pagatzaurtundua, Priscilla; Toro, Doris H.; Beymer, Charles H.; Kaz, Andrew M.; Elwing, Jill; Gill, Jeffrey A.; Goldsmith, Susan F.; Yao, Michael D.; Protiva, Petr; Pohl, Heiko; Kyriakides, Tassos; CONFIRM Study Group; Medicine, School of MedicineImportance: The Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM) randomized clinical trial sought to recruit 50 000 adults into a study comparing colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality outcomes after randomization to either an annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy. Objective: To (1) describe study participant characteristics and (2) examine who declined participation because of a preference for colonoscopy or stool testing (ie, fecal occult blood test [FOBT]/FIT) and assess that preference's association with geographic and temporal factors. Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional study within CONFIRM, which completed enrollment through 46 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers between May 22, 2012, and December 1, 2017, with follow-up planned through 2028, comprised veterans aged 50 to 75 years with an average CRC risk and due for screening. Data were analyzed between March 7 and December 5, 2022. Exposure: Case report forms were used to capture enrolled participant data and reasons for declining participation among otherwise eligible individuals. Main outcomes and measures: Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the cohort overall and by intervention. Among individuals declining participation, logistic regression was used to compare preference for FOBT/FIT or colonoscopy by recruitment region and year. Results: A total of 50 126 participants were recruited (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [6.9] years; 46 618 [93.0%] male and 3508 [7.0%] female). The cohort was racially and ethnically diverse, with 748 (1.5%) identifying as Asian, 12 021 (24.0%) as Black, 415 (0.8%) as Native American or Alaska Native, 34 629 (69.1%) as White, and 1877 (3.7%) as other race, including multiracial; and 5734 (11.4%) as having Hispanic ethnicity. Of the 11 109 eligible individuals who declined participation (18.0%), 4824 (43.4%) declined due to a stated preference for a specific screening test, with FOBT/FIT being the most preferred method (2820 [58.5%]) vs colonoscopy (1958 [40.6%]; P < .001) or other screening tests (46 [1.0%] P < .001). Preference for FOBT/FIT was strongest in the West (963 of 1472 [65.4%]) and modest elsewhere, ranging from 199 of 371 (53.6%) in the Northeast to 884 of 1543 (57.3%) in the Midwest (P = .001). Adjusting for region, the preference for FOBT/FIT increased by 19% per recruitment year (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.14-1.25). Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional analysis of veterans choosing nonenrollment in the CONFIRM study, those who declined participation more often preferred FOBT or FIT over colonoscopy. This preference increased over time and was strongest in the western US and may provide insight into trends in CRC screening preferences.Item Computer-generated reminders and quality of pediatric HIV care in a resource-limited setting(American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), 2013-03) Were, Martin C.; Nyandiko, Winstone M.; Huang, Kristin T. L.; Slaven, James E.; Shen, Changyu; Tierney, William M.; Vreeman, Rachel C.; Department of Medicine, IU School of MedicineOBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of clinician-targeted computer-generated reminders on compliance with HIV care guidelines in a resource-limited setting. METHODS: We conducted this randomized, controlled trial in an HIV referral clinic in Kenya caring for HIV-infected and HIV-exposed children (<14 years of age). For children randomly assigned to the intervention group, printed patient summaries containing computer-generated patient-specific reminders for overdue care recommendations were provided to the clinician at the time of the child's clinic visit. For children in the control group, clinicians received the summaries, but no computer-generated reminders. We compared differences between the intervention and control groups in completion of overdue tasks, including HIV testing, laboratory monitoring, initiating antiretroviral therapy, and making referrals. RESULTS: During the 5-month study period, 1611 patients (49% female, 70% HIV-infected) were eligible to receive at least 1 computer-generated reminder (ie, had an overdue clinical task). We observed a fourfold increase in the completion of overdue clinical tasks when reminders were availed to providers over the course of the study (68% intervention vs 18% control, P < .001). Orders also occurred earlier for the intervention group (77 days, SD 2.4 days) compared with the control group (104 days, SD 1.2 days) (P < .001). Response rates to reminders varied significantly by type of reminder and between clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician-targeted, computer-generated clinical reminders are associated with a significant increase in completion of overdue clinical tasks for HIV-infected and exposed children in a resource-limited setting.Item Current Knowledge and Research Priorities in the Digestive Manifestations of COVID-19(Elsevier, 2020) Aroniadis, Olga C.; DiMaio, Christopher J.; Dixon, Rebekah E.; Elmunzer, B. Joseph; Kolb, Jennifer M.; Mendelsohn, Robin; Ordiah, Collins O.; Rockey, Don C.; Singal, Amit G.; Spitzer, Rebecca L.; Tierney, William M.; Wani, Sachin; Yadav, Dhiraj; Global Health, School of Public HealthItem Designing a System for Patients Controlling Providers’ Access to their Electronic Health Records: Organizational and Technical Challenges(Springer, 2015-01) Leventhal, Jeremy C.; Cummins, Jonathan A.; Schwartz, Peter H.; Martin, Douglas K.; Tierney, William M.; Department of Medicine, IU School of MedicineBACKGROUND Electronic health records (EHRs) are proliferating, and financial incentives encourage their use. Applying Fair Information Practice principles to EHRs necessitates balancing patients’ rights to control their personal information with providers’ data needs to deliver safe, high-quality care. We describe the technical and organizational challenges faced in capturing patients’ preferences for patient-controlled EHR access and applying those preferences to an existing EHR. METHODS We established an online system for capturing patients’ preferences for who could view their EHRs (listing all participating clinic providers individually and categorically—physicians, nurses, other staff) and what data to redact (none, all, or by specific categories of sensitive data or patient age). We then modified existing data-viewing software serving a state-wide health information exchange and a large urban health system and its primary care clinics to allow patients’ preferences to guide data displays to providers. RESULTS Patients could allow or restrict data displays to all clinicians and staff in a demonstration primary care clinic, categories of providers (physicians, nurses, others), or individual providers. They could also restrict access to all EHR data or any or all of five categories of sensitive data (mental and reproductive health, sexually transmitted diseases, HIV/AIDS, and substance abuse) and for specific patient ages. The EHR viewer displayed data via reports, data flowsheets, and coded and free text data displayed by Google-like searches. Unless patients recorded restrictions, by default all requested data were displayed to all providers. Data patients wanted restricted were not displayed, with no indication they were redacted. Technical barriers prevented redacting restricted information in free textnotes. The program allowed providers to hit a “Break the Glass” button to override patients’ restrictions, recording the date, time, and next screen viewed. Establishing patient-control over EHR data displays was complex and required ethical, clinical, database, and programming expertise and difficult choices to overcome technical and health system constraints. CONCLUSIONS Assessing patients’ preferences for access to their EHRs and applying them in clinical practice requires wide-ranging technical, clinical, and bioethical expertise, to make tough choices to overcome significant technical and organization challenges.Item Digestive Manifestations in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019(Elsevier, 2020-10-01) Elmunzer, B. Joseph; Spitzer, Rebecca L.; Foster, Lydia D.; Merchant, Ambreen A.; Howard, Eric F.; Patel, Vaishali A.; West, Mary K.; Qayed, Emad; Nustas, Rosemary; Zakaria, Ali; Piper, Marc S.; Taylor, Jason R.; Jaza, Lujain; Forbes, Nauzer; Chau, Millie; Lara, Luis F.; Papachristou, Georgios I.; Volk, Michael L.; Hilson, Liam G.; Zhou, Selena; Kushnir, Vladimir M.; Lenyo, Alexandria M.; McLeod, Caroline G.; Amin, Sunil; Kuftinec, Gabriela N.; Yadav, Dhiraj; Fox, Charlie; Kolb, Jennifer M.; Pawa, Swati; Pawa, Rishi; Canakis, Andrew; Huang, Christopher; Jamil, Laith H.; Aneese, Andrew M.; Glamour, Benita K.; Smith, Zachary L.; Hanley, Katherine A.; Wood, Jordan; Patel, Harsh K.; Shah, Janak N.; Agarunov, Emil; Sethi, Amrita; Fogel, Evan L.; McNulty, Gail; Haseeb, Abdul; Trieu, Judy A.; Dixon, Rebekah E.; Yang, Jeong Yun; Mendelsohn, Robin B.; Calo, Delia; Aroniadis, Olga C.; LaComb, Joseph F.; Scheiman, James M.; Sauer, Bryan G.; Dang, Duyen T.; Piraka, Cyrus R.; Shah, Eric D.; Pohl, Heiko; Tierney, William M.; Mitchell, Stephanie; Condon, Ashwinee; Lenhart, Adrienne; Dua, Kulwinder S.; Kanagala, Vikram S.; Kamal, Ayesha; Singh, Vikesh K.; Pinto-Sanchez, Maria Ines; Hutchinson, Joy M.; Kwon, Richard S.; Korsnes, Sheryl J.; Singh, Harminder; Solati, Zahra; Willingham, Field F.; Yachimski, Patrick S.; Conwell, Darwin L.; Mosier, Evan; Azab, Mohamed; Patel, Anish; Buxbaum, James; Wani, Sachin; Chak, Amitabh; Hosmer, Amy E.; Keswani, Rajesh N.; DiMaio, Christopher J.; Bronze, Michael S.; Muthusamy, Raman; Canto, Marcia I.; Gjeorgjievski, V. Mihajlo; Imam, Zaid; Odish, Fadi; Edhi, Ahmed I.; Orosey, Molly; Tiwari, Abhinav; Patwardhan, Soumil; Brown, Nicholas G.; Patel, Anish A.; Ordiah, Collins O.; Sloan, Ian P.; Cruz, Lilian; Koza, Casey L.; Okafor, Uchechi; Hollander, Thomas; Furey, Nancy; Reykhart, Olga; Zbib, Natalia H.; Damianos, John A.; Esteban, James; Hajidiacos, Nick; Saul, Melissa; Mays, Melanie; Anderson, Gulsum; Wood, Kelley; Mathews, Laura; Diakova, Galina; Caisse, Molly; Wakefield, Lauren; Nitchie, Haley; Waljee, Akbar K.; Tang, Weijing; Zhang, Yueyang; Zhu, Ji; Deshpande, Amar R.; Rockey, Don C.; Alford, Teldon B.; Durkalski, Valerie; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground & Aims The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. We aimed to assess the prevalence, spectrum, severity, and significance of digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were abstracted manually from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. Results A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least 1 gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were increased to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76–1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.80–2.12) were not associated independently with mechanical ventilation or death. Conclusions Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common, but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.Item Digestive Manifestations in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019(Elsevier, 2021-07) Elmunzer, B. Joseph; Spitzer, Rebecca L.; Foster, Lydia D.; Merchant, Ambreen A.; Howard, Eric F.; Patel, Vaishali A.; West, Mary K.; Qayed, Emad; Nustas, Rosemary; Zakaria, Ali; Piper, Marc S.; Taylor, Jason R.; Jaza, Lujain; Forbes, Nauzer; Chau, Millie; Lara, Luis F.; Papachristou, Georgios I.; Volk, Michael L.; Hilson, Liam G.; Zhou, Selena; Kushnir, Vladimir M.; Lenyo, Alexandria M.; McLeod, Caroline G.; Amin, Sunil; Kuftinec, Gabriela N.; Yadav, Dhiraj; Fox, Charlie; Kolb, Jennifer M.; Pawa, Swati; Pawa, Rishi; Canakis, Andrew; Huang, Christopher; Jamil, Laith H.; Aneese, Andrew M.; Glamour, Benita K.; Smith, Zachary L.; Hanley, Katherine A.; Wood, Jordan; Patel, Harsh K.; Shah, Janak N.; Agarunov, Emil; Sethi, Amrita; Fogel, Evan L.; McNulty, Gail; Haseeb, Abdul; Trieu, Judy A.; Dixon, Rebekah E.; Yang, Jeong Yun; Mendelsohn, Robin B.; Calo, Delia; Aroniadis, Olga C.; LaComb, Joseph F.; Scheiman, James M.; Sauer, Bryan G.; Dang, Duyen T.; Piraka, Cyrus R.; Shah, Eric D.; Pohl, Heiko; Tierney, William M.; Mitchell, Stephanie; Condon, Ashwinee; Lenhart, Adrienne; Dua, Kulwinder S.; Kanagala, Vikram S.; Kamal, Ayesha; Singh, Vikesh K.; Pinto-Sanchez, Maria Ines; Hutchinson, Joy M.; Kwon, Richard S.; Korsnes, Sheryl J.; Singh, Harminder; Solati, Zahra; Willingham, Field F.; Yachimski, Patrick S.; Conwell, Darwin L.; Mosier, Evan; Azab, Mohamed; Patel, Anish; Buxbaum, James; Wani, Sachin; Chak, Amitabh; Hosmer, Amy E.; Keswani, Rajesh N.; DiMaio, Christopher J.; Bronze, Michael S.; Muthusamy, Raman; Canto, Marcia I.; Gjeorgjievski, V. Mihajlo; Imam, Zaid; Odish, Fadi; Edhi, Ahmed I.; Orosey, Molly; Tiwari, Abhinav; Patwardhan, Soumil; Brown, Nicholas G.; Patel, Anish A.; Ordiah, Collins O.; Sloan, Ian P.; Cruz, Lilian; Koza, Casey L.; Okafor, Uchechi; Hollander, Thomas; Furey, Nancy; Reykhart, Olga; Zbib, Natalia H.; Damianos, John A.; Esteban, James; Hajidiacos, Nick; Saul, Melissa; Mays, Melanie; Anderson, Gulsum; Wood, Kelley; Mathews, Laura; Diakova, Galina; Caisse, Molly; Wakefield, Lauren; Nitchie, Haley; Waljee, Akbar K.; Tang, Weijing; Zhang, Yueyang; Zhu, Ji; Deshpande, Amar R.; Rockey, Don C.; Alford, Teldon B.; Durkalski, Valerie; North American Alliance for the Study of Digestive Manifestations of COVID-19; Medicine, School of MedicineBACKGROUND & AIMS: The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. We aimed to assess the prevalence, spectrum, severity, and significance of digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were abstracted manually from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least 1 gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were increased to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.80-2.12) were not associated independently with mechanical ventilation or death. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common, but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.Item Do electronic health record systems "dumb down" clinicians?(Oxford University Press, 2022) Melton, Genevieve B.; Cimino, James J.; Lehmann, Christoph U.; Sengstack, Patricia R.; Smith, Joshua C.; Tierney, William M.; Miller, Randolph A.; Community and Global Health, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public HealthA panel sponsored by the American College of Medical Informatics (ACMI) at the 2021 AMIA Symposium addressed the provocative question: "Are Electronic Health Records dumbing down clinicians?" After reviewing electronic health record (EHR) development and evolution, the panel discussed how EHR use can impair care delivery. Both suboptimal functionality during EHR use and longer-term effects outside of EHR use can reduce clinicians' efficiencies, reasoning abilities, and knowledge. Panel members explored potential solutions to problems discussed. Progress will require significant engagement from clinician-users, educators, health systems, commercial vendors, regulators, and policy makers. Future EHR systems must become more user-focused and scalable and enable providers to work smarter to deliver improved care.Item Editorial Peer Reviewers' Recommendations at a General Medical Journal: Are They Reliable and Do Editors Care?(Public Library of Science, 2010-04-08) Kravitz, Richard L.; Franks, Peter; Feldman, Mitchell D.; Gerrity, Martha; Byrne, Cindy; Tierney, William M.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground Editorial peer review is universally used but little studied. We examined the relationship between external reviewers' recommendations and the editorial outcome of manuscripts undergoing external peer-review at the Journal of General Internal Medicine (JGIM). Methodology/Principal Findings We examined reviewer recommendations and editors' decisions at JGIM between 2004 and 2008. For manuscripts undergoing peer review, we calculated chance-corrected agreement among reviewers on recommendations to reject versus accept or revise. Using mixed effects logistic regression models, we estimated intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) at the reviewer and manuscript level. Finally, we examined the probability of rejection in relation to reviewer agreement and disagreement. The 2264 manuscripts sent for external review during the study period received 5881 reviews provided by 2916 reviewers; 28% of reviews recommended rejection. Chance corrected agreement (kappa statistic) on rejection among reviewers was 0.11 (p<.01). In mixed effects models adjusting for study year and manuscript type, the reviewer-level ICC was 0.23 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19–0.29) and the manuscript-level ICC was 0.17 (95% CI, 0.12–0.22). The editors' overall rejection rate was 48%: 88% when all reviewers for a manuscript agreed on rejection (7% of manuscripts) and 20% when all reviewers agreed that the manuscript should not be rejected (48% of manuscripts) (p<0.01). Conclusions/Significance Reviewers at JGIM agreed on recommendations to reject vs. accept/revise at levels barely beyond chance, yet editors placed considerable weight on reviewers' recommendations. Efforts are needed to improve the reliability of the peer-review process while helping editors understand the limitations of reviewers' recommendations.
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »