From: Peer assessment of outpatient consultation letters – feasibility and satisfaction
I. Site 1 (n = 4 writers with 10 letters each) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Item | GP | Specialist | p |
History | 4.04 ± 1.0 | 4.16 ± 0.95 | NS |
Physical Examination | 4.34 ± 0.90 | 4.23 ± 0.98 | NS |
Impression | 4.12 ± 0.90 | 4.14 ± 1.0 | NS |
Plan | 4.21 ± 0.85 | 4.21 ± 0.99 | NS |
Brevity | 3.87 ± 0.94 | 4.25 ± 0.87 | 0.003 |
Clarity | 4.00 ± 1.1 | 4.14 ± 1.0 | NS |
Format | 3.98 ± 1.1 | 4.01 ± 1.0 | NS |
Educational Value | 4.02 ± 0.95 | 3.90 ± 0.90 | NS |
Global rating | 4.04 ± 0.96 | 3.92 ± 0.97 | NS |
Overall score | 36.45 ± 7.36 | 36.97 ± 7.85 | NS |
II Site 2 (n = 5 writers with 10 letters each) | |||
Item | GP | Specialist | p |
History | 3.88 ± 1.1 | 4.40 ± 0.72 | 0.0001 |
Physical Examination | 3.90 ± 0.97 | 4.45 ± 0.71 | <0.0001 |
Impression | 4.00 ± 1.0 | 4.08 ± 0.96 | NS |
Plan | 4.14 ± 0.90 | 4.18 ± 0.87 | NS |
Brevity | 3.64 ± 1.2 | 3.83 ± 0.90 | NS |
Clarity | 3.931 ± .0 | 4.03 ± 0.91 | NS |
Format | 3.63 ± 1.1 | 3.68 ± 0.67 | NS |
Educational Value | 4.00 ± 1.0 | 3.38 ± 1.1 | <0.0001 |
Global rating | 3.88 ± 0.93 | 3.74 ± 0.91 | NS |
Overall score | 34.97 ± 7.70 | 35.79 ± 5.19 | NS |