When it comes to peer reviews, politics can play a major role in determining who gets scrutinized and why. Unfortunately, there are many cases where physicians are targeted for behavior issues or political reasons that have little to do with their actual performance.
Some examples of behavior issues that might trigger a peer review include practicing outside of one's area of expertise, negligence or malpractice, ethical violations, and inappropriate behavior with patients or colleagues.
As for political issues, there are many factors that could trigger a peer review, such as speaking out against the hospital or organization, reporting safety concerns or ethical violations, or simply not conforming to the organization's culture or expectations.
Unfortunately, peer reviews can often be used as a way to silence and get rid of physicians who are seen as troublemakers or threats to the status quo. This can be a serious issue, as it can leave physicians with no recourse and put patient safety at risk.
So, it's important to be aware of the potential for politics and bias in the peer review process, and to advocate for fair and transparent evaluations that are based on objective criteria. #peerreview #politics #physicianadvocacy #patientadvocacy #fairness
Farid Gharagozloo is a cardiothoracic surgeon, professor of surgery, and surgeon-in-chief at the Institute For Advanced Thoracic Surgery, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, and UCF Lake Nona Hospital.
Link in bio or visit kevinmd.com/podcast
SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST → https://www.kevinmd.com/podcast
RATE AND REVIEW → https://www.kevinmd.com/rate
FOLLOW ON INSTAGRAM → https://www.instagram.com/kevinphomd
FOLLOW ON TIKTOK → https://www.tiktok.com/@kevinphomd
