search

checklisthq / checklisthq.com

checklisthq.com
GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
4 stars 4 forks source link

Quality and 'Scoring' Checklists #47

Open wai2k opened 12 years ago

wai2k commented 12 years ago

Think about/do something about quality scoring of root checklists. Possible scale:

a. ENDORSED -by recognised authorative body governmental /NGO /Prof. Body e.g. WHO, NIH, NICE, etc.

b. PEER REVIEWED - Has been published in a recognised peer reviewed journal or subject to some other form of peer review e.g by a particular hospital or institution

c. PUBLISHED - Anything else intended for live use which is not a or b above

d. IN PREPERATION – Material published for comment, but not yet intended for live use

e. TEST – Test material published for software testing purposes only

But urgently segregate stuff intended for use from stuff which is not at or never intended to get to that stage.

You might also want to think about some form of crowd sourced quality ranking as well as or instead of the above – I would say as well as.

wai2k commented 12 years ago

There should be a mechanism for 'derived' with a link back to the original checklist.