“Sham peer review or malicious peer review is defined as the abuse of a medical peer review process to attack a doctor for personal or other non-medical reasons.”
“Most doctors — warns Dr Kaki — do not understand that ultimately your privileges are not dictated by your colleagues through a fair process, but hospital administration controls our destiny”. In 2018, Dr Kaki was subject to a campaign of retaliation that set out to revoke the well-respected cardiologist’s privileges. Today, Dr Kaki is Director of Mechanical Circulatory Support at Ascension and Clinical Associate Professor at Wayne State University School of Medicine.
In this week’s Parallax Dr Kalra’s guests are the team that fought for justice in Dr Kaki’s case: Dr Lawrence R. Huntoon, Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and Deborah Gordon, employment attorney.
Dr Kaki walks us through his Kafkaesque experience and the knowledge he acquired during his battle with his former hospital. We get insight into the stages of a peer review process and the role of key stakeholders. Dr Huntoon, expert in this field, helps us put Dr Kaki’s experience in context and talks about the prevalence of sham peer reviews through shocking cases. Ms Gordon supports the discussions with practical tips and insights on the role of an attorney. Join Ankur and his guests for a must listen show on your rights as a physician.
What do you need to know about the hospital peer review process and your rights? What can you do if targeted? What is Dr Kaki’s advice to physicians?
Resource: https://shmpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhm.12903
Stay tuned for Part 2 of Parallax’s Medico-Legal series with Dr Kalra and Dr Huntoon.
Questions and comments can be sent to “podcast@radcliffe-group.com” and may be answered by Ankur in the next episode.
Guests: @DrAmirKaki, Dr Lawrence R Huntoon and Deborah Gordon host: @AnkurKalraMD and produced by: @RadcliffeCARDIO.
What do you need to know about hospital investigations? What is the difference between OPPE and FPPE? How can you get educated on hospital bylaws and processes?
US Cardiology Review journal, has recently seen a 7-fold increase in female editorial board members in response to journal-based strategic initiatives and the stellar work of USC editorial board leadership, Ankur Kalra (Editor in Chief) and Bill Gogas (Deputy Editor in Chief), who were keen to drive this change. With thanks to Dr Anastasia Mihailidou’s tenure as a new board member and her suggested nominees, ten new female board members have recently joined US Cardiology Review’s editorial board.
In this episode, Mike opens up about his childhood in Stilwell, Oklahoma. Ankur and Mike discuss how the inductive quality of art can complement the deductive principles of science. Mike recalls earlier stages of his career and warns about the blinding effect of the ego-driven, competitive culture of cardiology. Ankur asks Mike about fatherhood and about his role as an educator.
What does it mean to be fearless as a medical professional? How can you protect yourself from the emotional toll of the profession? What is Mike’s advice to early career cardiologists?
Sponsored by Edwards.
During her interventional cardiology fellowship, Dr Baron became fascinated by the implementation of novel technologies. She earned her degree in Clinical Epidemiology and spent a year working at the FDA’s Device Evaluation unit.
In 2019 Dr Baron presented the results of her late-breaking trial, COAPT. Ankur invites Suzanne to discuss the economic analysis of the study and to give a short introduction to cost-effectiveness analysis. Suzanne provides an overview of the trial and they talk about the importance of understanding the value and benefits of new devices from both the patient and the health-economic point of viewpoint.
How should you start building a research programme? What are Chuck Simonton’s thoughts on the relationship between doctors and the industry? What is Chuck’s message to young cardiologists?
After the #MedBikini campaign provoked by a misogynistic study that scrutinized female doctors’ social media posts, this episode is about creating a safer environment for female healthcare professionals.