Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10796520›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000

Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.

M A Thomson O'Brien, A D Oxman, D A Davis, R B Haynes, N Freemantle, E L Harvey

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Multicentre, cluster-randomized clinical trial of algorithms for critical-care enteral and parenteral therapy (ACCEPT).CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2004
    Trial
  7. Cluster randomised controlled trial of an educational outreach visit to improve influenza and pneumococcal immunisation rates in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

M A Thomson O'BrienMcMaster Evidence-based Practice Centre, McMaster University, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, HSC 3H7, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8N 3Z5. maobrien@fhs.mcmaster.ca
A D Oxman
D A Davis
R B Haynes
N Freemantle
E L Harvey

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAudit and feedback has been identified as having the potential to change the practice of health care professionals.

objectivesTo assess the effects of audit and feedback on the practice of health professionals and patient outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE up to June 1997, the Research and Development Resource Base in Continuing Medical Education, and reference lists of related systematic reviews and articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of audit and feedback (defined as any summary of clinical performance of health care over a specified period of time). The participants were health care professionals responsible for patient care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. MAIN

resultsThirty-seven studies were included, involving more than 4977 physicians. The reporting of study methods was inadequate for almost all studies. In 31 out of 37 studies the randomisation process could not be determined. Information regarding data analysis was also lacking. For example, power calculations were not mentioned in 27 out of 37 studies. A variety of behaviours were targeted including the reduction of diagnostic test ordering, prescribing practices, preventive care, and the general management of a problem, for example hypertension. Twenty-eight studies measured physician performance, one study targeted patient outcomes in diabetes and the remaining eight studies measured both physician performance and patient outcomes. The relative percentage differences ranged from -16% to 152%. The clinical importance of the changes was not always clear. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsAudit and feedback can sometimes be effective in improving the practice of health care professionals, in particular prescribing and diagnostic test ordering. When it is effective, the effects appear to be small to moderate but potentially worthwhile. Those attempting to enhance professional behaviour should not rely solely on this approach.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareEducation, Medical, ContinuingFeedbackHealth PersonnelHealth Services ResearchHumansMedical AuditPractice Patterns, Physicians'Professional Practice

Identifiers

PMID10796520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.