Results Summary and Professional Abstract
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments.
Peer review identified the following strengths and limitations in the report:
- Reviewers asked for the report to place the study within the larger healthcare context. The investigators added language to the background and discussion sections describing the changes to value-based oncology care that occurred during the course of the study and may have affected study results.
- Reviewers suggested that the investigators add a study limitation related to the low survey response rate, but the authors pointed out that their response rate was similar to other Consumer Assessment of Health Providers and Systems (CAHPS) surveys. In addition, because the surveys were cross-sectional, the researchers were not aiming for including the same respondents before and after the intervention. For this reason, the researchers did not consider the low response rate as indicative of study drop-out.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
View the COI disclosure form.
Other Health Services Interventions
Training and Education Interventions