ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2001
An audit of audits: are we completing the cycle?
Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sustainable quality improvement interventions to ensure adequate physician documentation of chaperone presence in breast clinic: a multicycle clinical audit.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026Article
- Quality Assurance in Laparoscopic Gynecological Training: A Narrative Review of Standards with a Multicenter Expert Perspective on Pathways Toward Effective Education and Care.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
- Quality improvement education for medical students: a near-peer pilot study.BMC medical education · 2020Article
- Plasma HbA1c in the investigation of suspected heart failure in general practice: An audit of the 2018 NICE guidelines update.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2020Article
- FOUNDATION DOCTORS' AUDITS: EFFECTIVE OR NOT?The Ulster medical journal · 2018Article
- Audit of orthopaedic audits in an english teaching hospital: are we closing the loop?The open orthopaedics journal · 2010Article
- Auditing orthopaedic audit.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2008Article
- Payment by results or payment by outcome? The history of measuring medicine.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2006Review
- Hearing half the message? A re-audit of the care of patients with acute asthma by emergency ambulance crews in London.Quality & safety in health care · 2005Article
- Interface flow process audit: using the patient's career as a tracer of quality of care and of system organisation.International journal of integrated care · 2004Article
- Quality assessment for three common conditions in primary care: validity and reliability of review criteria developed by expert panels for angina, asthma and type 2 diabetes.Quality & safety in health care · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical audit plays an important part in the drive to improve quality of patient care and thus forms a cornerstone of clinical governance. We evaluated the standard of clinical audits conducted by all departments in a teaching hospital between 1996 and 1997. Of a total of 213 audits carried out, 102 (48%) were 'partial' and only 29 (14%) were 'full'. Recommendations for improvement emerged from 134 (63%) of the audits performed. In only 51 audits (24%) was the cycle completed by re-auditing, during the subsequent 3 years. Most departments undertake clinical audits but failure to close the loop undermines their effectiveness and wastes resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.