Peer Review Flashcards
four basic review categories
- peer review
- design / technical review
- regulatory review
- the expert witness
designer/author
person responsible for the work
client
the person or body commissioning the work
peer reviewer
person or persons undertaking the review
contract
document that defines the scope of the review, the basis of the remuneration and the responsibilities of the client, reviewer and designer
learned society
professional affiliated institution such as IPENZ
peer
person of equivalent expertise to the designer/author who has relevant experience to the work in question
purpose of peer review
- whether the completed work has met the objectives set out for it
- other options that could have been included in the design
- whether the evaluation of options is rigorous and fair
- the validity of assumptions
- the validity of conclusions
- the process towards completion of the work
- the validity of the reccommendations
- the objectives set out for the work
- adherence to relevant regulations and codes of practice
- the fitness for purpose of the work
when to bring in peer reviewer?
- if the peer reviewer can have input into the scope of work, design process, projected planning and completed work review, this can lead to a more acceptable outcome for the client
- peer reviewer can have review inputs at specified points to aid the design process and avoid problems
- peer reviewer can act as an adviser to the designer
who can be a peer reviewer
- must be recognised by fellow members of the appropriate learned society as at least equal in experience and technical capability to the designer
- often will have more experience of similar works than the designer
- must be independent from the designer’s organisation and have no financial or other interest in the outcome of the review
- must disclose any conflicts of interest
the ethics of peer review
- must abide by the code of ethics of the appropriate learned society
- must avoid usurping the role of the designer or succumbing to professional jealousy
- must report against only the criteria/restrictions that were put in place for the designer
- must respect the intellectual property made available
- must avoid using hindsight
Scope of peer review services
- review of completed work
- project peer review
- competence peer review
review of completed work
basic service in which the peer reviewer has no influence on the development of the work
project peer review
more complex task, involves the peer reviewer in the development of the work
competence peer review
- evaluate a professional’s experience and capability in relation to their competence to undertake tasks as a member of a learned society
- peer reviewer can discuss the relevant experience with the individual concerned
who appoints a peer reviewer
- the client will appoint, as they have a vested interest in getting the work/design completed satisfactorily
- often will select from candidates nominated by the designer
- peer reviewer is assumed to be able to work with the designer in a context of trust and respect for intellectual property
peer reviewer should enter into a written contract for services with the client, including the following elements:
- purpose of the review
- objectives of the work or design given to the designer
- the scope of the review
- the supply of all relevant documentation by the designer
- the lines of communication between designer and peer reviewer, and peer reviewer and client
- the reporting schedule for interim reviews
- the limit of the peer reviewer’s responsibility in contract and in tort
- who, apart from the client, will use the review and for what purpose
the report from the peer reviewer to the client should include:
- who is entitled to rely on the report and under what circumstances
- the scope of the report
- the purpose of the report
- disclaimers
- qualifying statements as to work not undertaken, matters requiring further investigation, reliance on information provided by others, and assumptions made
purpose of a design/technical review
to check assumptions, design method, arithmetical accuracy and conclusions drawn by the designer
- review will include compliance with regulations, laws, design codes and internal design methods
who can review for a design/technical review
- independence of the review is not an issue, so mostly undertaken in-house
- direct working relationship between the peer reviewer and the designer, and all assumptions, calculations and procedures are open for review
- intellectual property not an issue
purpose of a regulatory review
to assess whether the design complies with pertinent regulations, consent requirements and laws
- does not assess the design objectives, processes, options and assumptions
who can undertake regulatory review
- no direct relationship between peer reviewer and designer
peer reviewer’s role in regulatory review
- identify areas of the design that need to be addressed and to invite the designer to resolve them to the peer reviewer’s satisfaction
- the peer reviewer does not become involved in resolving the issues
role of an expert witness
- can be arduous and testing, involving many ethical issues
- expert witness is a servant of the court, and their advice must be unbiased
- expert witness asked by legal counsel or the commisioner of an enquiry to advise the court on specified aspects of work undertaken by another designer
- should not exceed his/her experience in answering questions, and keep to the matter of the question
- should act independently and not as an advocated for the party that has commissioned them
- should avoid being judgemental and giving an opinion as to negligence
- must be circumspect about using the benefit of hindsight
