Literature reviews, peer review and checklists ....

This article is pretty interesting. I have been pitching the question of using checklists as reliablity tools in the EIK process for a while (with a fair amount of pushback and "deer in the headlights" reactions), and wondered what my colleagues here thought of the tool presented in the article.

An Evidence Based Checklist for the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies
Jessie McGowan, Margaret Sampson, Carol Lefebvre
Evidence-based Libr Inform Pract. Vol 5, No 1 (2010); 149-154.
http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/7402/6436

The process/tool wasn't designed to serve as a "real time" checklist (like a pilot's or a surgical time out), but does it touch on things that may play out in the development of one. I also like the author's ascertain that peer review (in this sense) is a professional responsibilty rather than a luxury and should be approached as such. Granted this article doesn't discuss these ideas squarely in the context of safety, but perhaps it can help us start that dialogue?

The stone age didn't end cos we ran out of stones.

Innovation consultant Sarah Fraser shared this link via Twitter -

The Value of the Stretch Goal The stoneage didn't end cos we ran out of stones.

What do we need to see the ticking clock regarding knowledge sharing and patient safety? Why isn't there more push, more competition, more accountabilty, more teamwork and more innovation around this point? Are the needs and the problems so latent that they are dismissed? Are innovators in this area suffering due the intense cultural issues surrounding sharing of tacit knowledge in the acute care environment and the challenges around measuring it?