Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Journal Article

Five-year results of the peer assessment program of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

R. G. McAuley, W. M. Paul, G. H. Morrison, R. F. Beckett and C. H. Goldsmith
CMAJ December 01, 1990 143 (11) 1193-1199;
R. G. McAuley
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W. M. Paul
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G. H. Morrison
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R. F. Beckett
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
C. H. Goldsmith
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
Loading

Abstract

The office practices of 918 physicians selected through stratified random sampling from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) registry were assessed by peers and the Peer Assessment Committee of the CPSO from 1981 to 1985. The sample comprised 662 general practitioners (GPs) and family physicians (FPs) and 256 specialists in 11 fields. Of the physicians 749 (82%) had neither deficient records nor an unsatisfactory level of patient care. Of the GPs and FPs 97 (15%) had serious deficiencies in one or both areas, as compared with 4 (2%) of the specialists (p2 less than 0.00001). The proportions of certificants of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada and of the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) with serious deficiencies were low (2% and 3% respectively). Three statistically significant predictors of physician performance were found among the GPs and FPs: age, CFPC membership status and type of practice. Of the 56 physicians who were reassessed 6 to 12 months later 29 (52%) had made the improvements recommended by the committee. Our findings demonstrate the need, feasibility and acceptance of a peer assessment program of office practices in Ontario.

  • Copyright © 1990 by Canadian Medical Association
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 143, Issue 11
1 Dec 1990
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Five-year results of the peer assessment program of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Five-year results of the peer assessment program of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
R. G. McAuley, W. M. Paul, G. H. Morrison, R. F. Beckett, C. H. Goldsmith
CMAJ Dec 1990, 143 (11) 1193-1199;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Five-year results of the peer assessment program of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
R. G. McAuley, W. M. Paul, G. H. Morrison, R. F. Beckett, C. H. Goldsmith
CMAJ Dec 1990, 143 (11) 1193-1199;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Remediation and rehabilitation programmes for health professionals: challenges for the future
  • Getting back on track: a systematic review of the outcomes of remediation and rehabilitation programmes for healthcare professionals with performance concerns
  • Effects of continuing professional development on clinical performance: Results of a study involving family practitioners in Quebec
  • Les medecins de famille ages devraient-ils prendre leur retraite?
  • Should older family physicians retire?
  • Revalidation of doctors in Canada
  • Assessment of physician performance in Alberta: the Physician Achievement Review
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • PEI's fixed link to mainland a living laboratory for occupational medicine
  • Impact on health care adds to the social cost of homelessness, MDs say
  • Bioethics for clinicians: 6. Advance care planning
Show more Journal Article

Similar Articles

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire