Governance

Preamble: In creating a "Guideline" concerning peer review, the AAPM recognizes there are at least two categories of review which may occur: those initiated by the incumbent physicist as part of an ongoing quality assurance process, and those initiated by someone else. Procedures and guidelines regarding the former are published on www.aapm.org. In the case of reviews not initiated by the incumbent physicist, the AAPM does not affirm nor reject the process of review. In the interest of protecting the rights of the incumbents in such cases, these are the expectations the incumbent should rightfully enjoy.

Expectations:

1. The review should be performed by a Qualified Medical Physicist peer, i.e., a medical physicist who has similar or senior credentials and is familiar with the type of practice setting.
2. The Medical Physicist being reviewed should receve a courtesy call from the reviewer to establish mutually agreeable times and to communicate processes and goals for the review.
3. The reviewer should have no present or past professional relationship with the entity requesting the review, e.g., no close personal, professional, or training relationship.
4. The Medical Physicist being reviewed should receive a copy of the final report, both oral and written.

All care must be exercised when reviewing an incumbent so as not to jeopardize the incumbent's position unnecessarily (e.g., by the expression of personal opinions or judgments beyond those based on the data presented.) The process should be used to create the opportunity for improvement (and/or enhancement of the working environment, equipment, personnel, etc.) for all concerned, as well as the community at large.