Talk:Medical peer review

This article was nominated for deletion on 23 January 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

reorganization

I have reorganized several sections and excised the following from the section on the committee itself, where it didn't seem to belong: "Each state has its own definition of "protected" peer review activities. In California, for example, not only are physician medical staffs afforded protection as peer review committees, but so are health plans and disability insurance plans, local non-profit medical societies, and groups of more than 25 licentiates." Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 18:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I'm not sure which term is more common, but physician peer review seems to describe the same process(es). Tijfo098 (talk) 04:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe the existing article medical peer review has any content worth saving. physician peer review is a more specific term. To include Nursing peer review, the umbrella term Clinical Peer Review would be more appropriate, since "medical" is too-often used to refer to the discipline of Medicine in contrast with Nursing.Tom Bergen (talk) 13:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Clinical peer review

Distinction between the two is very minor and can easily combined into one article. Randykitty (talk) 12:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support The articles should be merged. Either name works. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merged. Fgnievinski (talk) 04:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the proposal was to merge "clinical" into "medical", the latter being the broader term... --Randykitty (talk) 04:59, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]