Peer Review of Psychotherapeutic Treatments in Psychiatry: A Review of the Literature

References

• Kosky R. Peer review, a review of the literature on the American experience 1972-1982. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 1984; 18: 64–69
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Task Force on Peer Review in Psychiatry. Position statement on peer review in psychiatry. American Journal of Psychiatry 1973; 130: 381–384
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Luke R D, Modrow R E. Professionalism, accountability and peer review. Health Services Research 1982; 17: 113–123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan F W. Peer review and professional ethics. American Journal of Psychiatry 1977; 134: 186–188
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Langsley D G. Peer review. Comprehensive textbook of psychiatry. 4th ed, H I Kaplan, B J Sadock. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore 1985; 1888–1893
   Google Scholar
• Elkins A M, Hamilton J M, Altman H G. Peer review. Comprehensive text book of psychiatry. 5th ed, H I Kaplan, B J Sadock. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore 1989; 2071–2074
   Google Scholar
• Mattson M R. Quality assurance: a literature review of a changing field. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1984; 35: 605–616
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zusman J. Quality assurance in mental health care. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1988; 39: 1286–1290
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chodoff P, Santora P. Psychiatric peer review: The Washington, DC experience, 1972-1975. American Journal of Psychiatry 1977; 134: 121–125
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Strieker G, Cohen L H. A.P.A./CHAMPUS peer review projects: implications for research and practice. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 1984; 15: 96–108
   Google Scholar
• Gabbard G O, Takahashi T, Davidson J, Bauman-Bourk M, Ensroth K. A psychodynamic perspective on the clinical impact of insurance review. American Journal of Psychiatry 1991; 148: 318–323
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holthaus D. PROs: Peering harder in the 1990s. 1989; 42–46, Hospitals
   Google Scholar
• Cummings N. The future of psychotherapy, one psychologist's perspective. American Journal of Psychiatry 1987; 41: 349–360
   Google Scholar
• MacInnes R. A model for effective clinical peer review. Australian Clinical Review 1990; 10: 58–65
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pylkknen K. A quality assurance program for psychotherapy-the Finnish experience. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy 1989; 4: 13–22
   Google Scholar
• Manual of psychiatric peer review. 3rd ed. American Psychiatric Association, Washington 1985
   Google Scholar
• El-Guebaly N. Peer review: empirical data base and practical implications. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 1988; 33: 645–649
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? Journal of the American Medical Association 1988; 260: 1743–1748
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donabedian A. Models for organising the delivery of health services and criteria for evaluating them. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly: Health and Society 1972; 50: 103–154
   Google Scholar
• Donabedian A. Advantages and limitations of explicit criteria for assessing the quality of health care. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly: Health and Society 1981; 59: 99–106
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Health Services Research Group. Quality of care: I. What is quality and how can it he measured?. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1992; 146: 2153–2158
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brook R H, Kamberg C J, Luhr K N. Quality assessment in mental health. Professional Psychology 1982; 13: 34–39
   Google Scholar
• Simon G C, Rosenberg A M. Reviewing professional practice: implications for the mental health consumer. Professional Psychology 1982; 13: 159–166
   Google Scholar
• Cohen L H. Oyster-Nelson CK. Clinicians' evaluations of psychodynamic psychotherapy: experimental data on psychological peer review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1981; 49: 583–589
   Google Scholar
• Shepherd G L. Some results of peer review. Psychiatric peer review: prelude and promise, J Hamilton. American Psychiatric Press, Washington 1985; 195–200
   Google Scholar
• Peer review - the West Australian experience. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 1979; 13: 353–356
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shwed H J, Kuvin S F, Baliga R K. Medicaid audit: crisis in confidentiality and the patient - psychiatrist relationship. American Journal of Psychiatry 1979; 136: 447–450
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gutheil T G. Paranoia and progress notes: a guide to forensically informed psychiatric record keeping. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1980; 31: 479–482
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brook R H. Quality - can we measure it?. New England Journal of Medicine 1977; 296: 170–172
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sederer L I. Utilisation review and quality assurance: staying in the black and working with the blues. General Hospital Psychiatry 1987; 9: 210–219
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rudominer H S. Peer review, third party payment, and the analytic situation: a case report. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 1981; 32: 773–795
   Google Scholar
• McAuliffe W. Measuring the quality of medical care: process versus outcome. Milbank Fund Quarterly: Health and Society 1979; 57: 118–152
   Google Scholar
• Ciarlo J. Accountability revisited. The arrival of client outcome evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning 1982; 5: 31–36
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dorwart R A. The second generation of quality review?. Quality Review Bulletin 1991; 17: 330
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• London P, Klerman G L. Evaluating psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychiatry 1982; 139: 709–717
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strupp H H. Psychotherapy. Research, practice and public policy (How to avoid dead ends). American Psychologist 1986; 41: 120–130
   Google Scholar
• Kass F, Charles E, Buckley P. Two year follow-up of a peer review training program for residents. American Journal of Psychiatry 1980; 137: 244–245
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Newman D E, Luft L. The peer review process: education versus control. American Journal of Psychiatry 1974; 131: 1363–1366
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Luft L R, Sampson L M, Newman D E. Effects of peer review on outpatient psychotherapy: therapist and patient follow-up survey. American Journal of Psychiatry 1976; 133: 891–895
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gottesman D M. Measuring attitudes about peer review in a university department of psychiatry. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1974; 25: 39–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Offenkrantz N. Psychodynamic aspects of peer review. Psychiatric peer review: prelude and promise, J Hamilton. American Psychiatric Press, Washington 1985; 81–94
   Google Scholar
• Lindenthal J J, Thomas C S. Psychiatrists, the public and confidentiality. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 1982; 170: 319–323
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Theaman M. The impact of peer review on professional practice. American Psychologist 1984; 39: 406–414
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Holmes J, Lindley R. Psychotherapists: servants of two masters?. The values of psychotherapy. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1989; 176–186
   Google Scholar
• Zuckerman R L. Intragenic factors in “managed” psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy 1989; 43: 118–131
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Allen M G. Peer review of group therapy: Washington D.C. 1972-1977. American Journal of Psychiatry 1979; 136: 444–447
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klerman G L. Treatment assessment and the future of psychiatric practice. Psychosomatics 1979; 20: 6–7
   Google Scholar
• Sechrest L B. Research on quality assurance. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 1987; 18: 113–116
   Google Scholar
• Parlour R R. Reflections of a CHAMPUS-APA peer reviewer. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 1986; 47: 71–74
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shepherd G L. Formats for peer review of dynamic psychotherapy. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1985; 36: 517–520
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Witt E. A look backward: the peer review program of the American Psychological Association. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 1989; 20: 9–16
   Google Scholar
• Chestnut W J, Wilson S, Wright R H, Zemlich M J. Problems, protests and proposals. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 1987; 18: 107–112
   Google Scholar
• Parry G. Improving psychotherapy services: applications of research, audit and evaluation. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 1992; 31: 3–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vuori H. Optimal and logical quality: two neglected aspects of the quality of health services. Medical Care 1980; 18: 975–985
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schofield W. Overview and update. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 1986; 18: 117–118
   Google Scholar
• Bent R J, Shueman S A. History, administrative experiences, and empirical issues. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 1987; 18: 102–106
   Google Scholar
• Green S A. The process of reviewing peers. General Hospital Psychiatry 1989; 11: 264–267
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldman R L. The reliability of peer assessments of quality of care. Journal of the American Medical Association 1992; 267: 958–960
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar