The phrase "a quality review of" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to an evaluation or assessment of something's quality, such as a product, service, or process.
Example: "The team conducted a quality review of the new software to ensure it met all performance standards."
Alternatives: "an evaluation of quality" or "a quality assessment of".
Priorities included implementation of a progressive action policy to enhance program compliance, a quality review of addictionologists' evaluations, an examination of the evidence-based practice foundation of the license reinstatement process, and an internal audit to assess quality improvements.
In addition GP and hospital activity data were collected and there was a quality review of a case series.
These debriefs allowed for a quality review of the qualitative data and discussions about emerging themes and instances of uncertainty where negative or contradictory data needed further exploration.
A more complete evaluation of differences in triage associated with CDS would require a quality review of recorded calls as has been described by Huibers [ 23].
A quality review of UNICEF's Executive Board Country Programme Documents for 2006, SPPG, 2007 This baseline assessment examined a selection of Country Programme Documents submitted to the Executive Board in 2006.
A quality review of each RCT was performed by examining details of randomization, generation of random numbers, details of double-blinding procedure, information on withdrawals, and concealment of allocation [ 5].
Critical elements of a quality review include the choice of the question, explicit eligibility criteria, systematic search of the literature, article abstraction, and sometimes pooling of the data by using meta-analysis with direct or indirect comparison of study findings.
This audit provides a retrospective quality review of primary palatal surgery at the Seoul Asan Medical Center and a basis for ongoing research efforts to establish an optimal treatment regimen for patients with cleft palate.
Although we did not perform independent, dual data abstraction (the gold standard for systematic reviews), we employed a rigorous quality review of abstracted data, and we do not believe that this approach compromised the accuracy of our results.
The EO carries out an annual quality review of evaluation reports submitted from all levels (HQ, region, country).
The paper is a current, high quality review of the novel echocardiographic approaches to quantification of myocardial function in the context of training-induced remodeling.
