Peer Review

Peer Review Criteria:

• Important Clinical Problem: To what extent does the abstract illustrate an important clinical problem(s) commonly encountered by internists, such as diagnostic, therapeutic, or management dilemma?
• Insight into Clinical Practice, Education, or Research: To what extent does the abstract provide insight into clinical practice, education or research in either outpatient or hospital settings?
• Relevance to General Internal Medicine: To what extent does the abstract offer a diagnosis, physical examination, or management pearl that is important to general internists?
• Discussion of Relevant Literature: To what extent does the abstract include a discussion of relevant literature, as if submitting the vignette for peer-reviewed publication?
• Quality of Writing: Is the writing clear and organized to effectively communicate findings?

Peer Review Criteria:

• Importance of the Research Question to General Internists: To what extent does the abstract address a topic that is important and to what degree will the results advance concepts in General Internal Medicine?
• Strength and Appropriateness of Methods
  • Is the study design clearly described?
  • Are sampling procedures adequately described, including inclusion and exclusion criteria; is there potential selection bias?
  • Are the measures reliable and valid?
  • Are possible confounding factors addressed?
  • Are the statistical analyses appropriate for the study design, and are they the best that could have been used?
  • Is there discussion of the statistical power?
• Validity of Conclusions and Implications
  • Are conclusions clearly stated and justified by the data?
  • Are implications strong enough to influence how clinicians/teachers/researchers “act” in clinical practice, teaching, or future research?
• Quality of Writing: is the writing clear and organized to effectively communicate findings?

Peer Review Criteria:

• Relevance/Importance: Is this topic clearly stated, important and relevant to the practice of GIM? Does it fill an unmet need and would implementation lead to an improvement in clinical practice?
• Creativity/Originality: How novel is either the problem being addressed or the mechanism of intervention?
• Methods: Is the study design, including objectives, target audience, and intervention, clearly described? Are the quantitative or qualitative assessments used appropriate for this innovation?
• Findings/Measures of Success: Are measures of success clear? Are the findings to date clearly presented?
• Feasibility/Generalizability: Are the organizational context, complexity, cost, and resource utilization appropriately described as appropriate? Are the results generalizable, i.e., could this innovation be implemented at other institutions.

Peer Review Criteria:

• Objective or Purpose of Innovation: Are the objectives/purpose of the innovation clear, measurable, and appropriate for the target audience?
• Appropriate Methods:
  • Is the intervention well described? Are the teaching methods appropriate to meet the defined objectives?
  • Are assessment measures adequate to evaluate outcomes?
  • Do the methods use or create a standard that can be replicated?
• Evaluation or Measure of Success:
  • Are the measures of success appropriate and clear?
  • Are areas for improvement discussed?
  • Are results interpreted accurately?
  • Are conclusions clearly stated and supported?
  • Are the implications fully appropriate?
• Degree of Innovation:
  • Is this work truly innovative? Do the authors show that it is a novel concept or an implementation not done elsewhere?
  • Does it fill an unmet need?
  • Has the innovation been explored or pursued before?
  • Will the innovation fill gaps yet unrealized in the medical education community?
• Potential for Broader Impact:
  • Is it more than an adaptation to local needs?
  • Is the innovation feasible elsewhere?
  • Does the abstract convey how the innovation can be implemented?
  • Is there reflection on lessons learned, and what may be valuable to others?
  • Will the innovation be simple to adapt to other programs?