Performance improvement/research advisory panel: A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research

Lynn S. Platteborze, Stacey Young-mccaughan, Ileana King-Letzkus, Annette McClinton, Ann Halliday, Thomas C. Jefferson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The determination of whether an activity is performance improvement governed by The Joint Commission standards and local hospital policy or research governed by federal regulation and requiring institutional review board (IRB) review and approval can be complex, especially in academic clinical organizations. Both processes can address scientific validity, fair participant selection, favorable risk-benefit ratio, respect for participants, and independent review. In an attempt to guide staff as to whether their project needs IRB review or not, a performance improvement/research advisory panel (PIRAP) was formed to serve two military organizations. In this article, performance improvement and quality improvement is differentiated from research as much as possible, the composition and function of PIRAP is described, and guidelines for publishing findings that support the nature of the project are provided.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)289-291
Number of pages3
JournalMilitary Medicine
Volume175
Issue number4
StatePublished - Apr 2010

Fingerprint

Quality Improvement
Research Ethics Committees
Research
Organizations
Joints
Odds Ratio
Guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Platteborze, L. S., Young-mccaughan, S., King-Letzkus, I., McClinton, A., Halliday, A., & Jefferson, T. C. (2010). Performance improvement/research advisory panel: A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research. Military Medicine, 175(4), 289-291.

Performance improvement/research advisory panel : A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research. / Platteborze, Lynn S.; Young-mccaughan, Stacey; King-Letzkus, Ileana; McClinton, Annette; Halliday, Ann; Jefferson, Thomas C.

In: Military Medicine, Vol. 175, No. 4, 04.2010, p. 289-291.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Platteborze, LS, Young-mccaughan, S, King-Letzkus, I, McClinton, A, Halliday, A & Jefferson, TC 2010, 'Performance improvement/research advisory panel: A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research', Military Medicine, vol. 175, no. 4, pp. 289-291.
Platteborze LS, Young-mccaughan S, King-Letzkus I, McClinton A, Halliday A, Jefferson TC. Performance improvement/research advisory panel: A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research. Military Medicine. 2010 Apr;175(4):289-291.
Platteborze, Lynn S. ; Young-mccaughan, Stacey ; King-Letzkus, Ileana ; McClinton, Annette ; Halliday, Ann ; Jefferson, Thomas C. / Performance improvement/research advisory panel : A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research. In: Military Medicine. 2010 ; Vol. 175, No. 4. pp. 289-291.
@article{0b9eb7999ecb409d8ada34c22428a039,
title = "Performance improvement/research advisory panel: A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research",
abstract = "The determination of whether an activity is performance improvement governed by The Joint Commission standards and local hospital policy or research governed by federal regulation and requiring institutional review board (IRB) review and approval can be complex, especially in academic clinical organizations. Both processes can address scientific validity, fair participant selection, favorable risk-benefit ratio, respect for participants, and independent review. In an attempt to guide staff as to whether their project needs IRB review or not, a performance improvement/research advisory panel (PIRAP) was formed to serve two military organizations. In this article, performance improvement and quality improvement is differentiated from research as much as possible, the composition and function of PIRAP is described, and guidelines for publishing findings that support the nature of the project are provided.",
author = "Platteborze, {Lynn S.} and Stacey Young-mccaughan and Ileana King-Letzkus and Annette McClinton and Ann Halliday and Jefferson, {Thomas C.}",
year = "2010",
month = "4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "175",
pages = "289--291",
journal = "Military Medicine",
issn = "0026-4075",
publisher = "Association of Military Surgeons of the US",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Performance improvement/research advisory panel

T2 - A model for determining whether a project is a performance or quality improvement activity or research

AU - Platteborze, Lynn S.

AU - Young-mccaughan, Stacey

AU - King-Letzkus, Ileana

AU - McClinton, Annette

AU - Halliday, Ann

AU - Jefferson, Thomas C.

PY - 2010/4

Y1 - 2010/4

N2 - The determination of whether an activity is performance improvement governed by The Joint Commission standards and local hospital policy or research governed by federal regulation and requiring institutional review board (IRB) review and approval can be complex, especially in academic clinical organizations. Both processes can address scientific validity, fair participant selection, favorable risk-benefit ratio, respect for participants, and independent review. In an attempt to guide staff as to whether their project needs IRB review or not, a performance improvement/research advisory panel (PIRAP) was formed to serve two military organizations. In this article, performance improvement and quality improvement is differentiated from research as much as possible, the composition and function of PIRAP is described, and guidelines for publishing findings that support the nature of the project are provided.

AB - The determination of whether an activity is performance improvement governed by The Joint Commission standards and local hospital policy or research governed by federal regulation and requiring institutional review board (IRB) review and approval can be complex, especially in academic clinical organizations. Both processes can address scientific validity, fair participant selection, favorable risk-benefit ratio, respect for participants, and independent review. In an attempt to guide staff as to whether their project needs IRB review or not, a performance improvement/research advisory panel (PIRAP) was formed to serve two military organizations. In this article, performance improvement and quality improvement is differentiated from research as much as possible, the composition and function of PIRAP is described, and guidelines for publishing findings that support the nature of the project are provided.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77953295749&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77953295749&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 20446506

AN - SCOPUS:77953295749

VL - 175

SP - 289

EP - 291

JO - Military Medicine

JF - Military Medicine

SN - 0026-4075

IS - 4

ER -