Interrater reliability to assure valid content in peer review of CME-accredited presentations

Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 242-245

  Quigg, Mark ^a   Lado, Fred A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^b ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Accreditation; Content; Continuing; Credit; Education; Interrater reliability; Medical; Neurology

Indexed keywords

ACCREDITATION; ARTICLE; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; EDUCATION; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NEUROLOGY; PEER REVIEW; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

ACCREDITATION; AUDIOVISUAL AIDS; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, CONTINUING; NEUROLOGY; PEER REVIEW; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 74949089872     PISSN: 08941912     EISSN: 1554558X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/chp.20042     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Anonymous. http://www.accme.org/. Accessed September 3, 2009.
2. Siegel S, Castellan NJ. Nominally scaled data and the kappa statistic K. In: Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1988:284-291.
3. Davis NL, Galliher JM, Spano MS, Main DS, Brannigan M, Pace WD. Evaluating conflicts of interest in research presented in CME venues. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2008;28:220-227.
4. Takhar J, Dixon D, Donahue J, et al. Developing an instrument to measure bias in CME. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2007;27:118-123.
5. Barnes BE, Cole JG, King CT, et al. A risk stratification tool to assess commercial influences on continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2007;27:234-240.