Abstract

AbstractObjective: The aim of this study was to establish the impact of peer review on estimated ABR thresholds. Study design: The reported ABR thresholds of two groups of 38 babies tested over a period of six months when a system of formal peer review was in place, and another period of six months when it was not in place, were retrospectively analysed by expert clinicians. Results: The modal differences between experts and tester estimated threshold with and without peer review were 5dB (-10 to +20) and 0dB (-10 to +35), respectively. Wilcoxon's signed-rank test for paired samples revealed a small but significant difference in estimated thresholds between experts and tester irrespective of whether tester was subjected to peer review on the day of the test or not. Conclusion: Peer review provides opportunities for peer support and continuing professional development. A system of formal peer review is strongly advocated.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call