ArticleImplementation science : IS2010
Feedback GAP: study protocol for a cluster-randomized trial of goal setting and action plans to increase the effectiveness of audit and feedback interventions in primary care.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00996645 (Cluster Randomized Trial of a Goal-Setting Intervention With Performance Feedback Reports Regarding Diabetes and Coronary Artery Disease for Family Physicians in Ontario), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Cluster Randomized Trial of a Goal-Setting Intervention With Performance Feedback Reports Regarding Diabetes and Coronary Artery Disease for Family Physicians in Ontario
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the content and delivery of feedback facilitation co-interventions: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- Growing literature, stagnant science? Systematic review, meta-regression and cumulative analysis of audit and feedback interventions in health care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2014Pooled it
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Improving stroke prevention therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation in primary care: protocol for a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial.Implementation science : IS · 2016Trial
- Feedback GAP: pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial of goal setting and action plans to increase the effectiveness of audit and feedback interventions in primary care.Implementation science : IS · 2013Trial
- Reflective Tool on Advanced Access to Support Primary Healthcare Teams: Development and Validation of an Online Questionnaire.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient- and Physician-Level Factors Associated With Adherence to C-CHANGE Recommendations in Primary Care Settings in Ontario.CJC open · 2020Article
- Changing behaviour 'more or less'-do theories of behaviour inform strategies for implementation and de-implementation? A critical interpretive synthesis.Implementation science : IS · 2018Review
- Identifying diabetes cases from administrative data: a population-based validation study.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Does audit and feedback improve the adoption of recommended practices? Evidence from a longitudinal observational study of an emerging clinical network in Kenya.BMJ global health · 2017Article
- Improving Care for Patients With or at Risk for Chronic Kidney Disease Using Electronic Medical Record Interventions: A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial Protocol.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2017Article
- User Interface Requirements for Web-Based Integrated Care Pathways: Evidence from the Evaluation of an Online Care Pathway Investigation Tool.Journal of medical systems · 2015Article
- Combining administrative data feedback, reflection and action planning to engage primary care professionals in quality improvement: qualitative assessment of short term program outcomes.BMC health services research · 2015Article
- "My approach to this job is...one person at a time": Perceived discordance between population-level quality targets and patient-centred care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2014Article
- No more 'business as usual' with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention.Implementation science : IS · 2014Article
- Effective components of feedback from Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) in youth mental health care: study protocol of a three-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial.BMC psychiatry · 2014Article
- Designing a theory-informed, contextually appropriate intervention strategy to improve delivery of paediatric services in Kenyan hospitals.Implementation science : IS · 2013Article
- Allocation techniques for balance at baseline in cluster randomized trials: a methodological review.Trials · 2012Review
- Theories of behaviour change synthesised into a set of theoretical groupings: introducing a thematic series on the theoretical domains framework.Implementation science : IS · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAudit and feedback to physicians is commonly used alone or as part of multifaceted interventions. While it can play an important role in quality improvement, the optimal design of audit and feedback is unknown. This study explores how feedback can be improved to increase acceptability and usability in primary care. The trial seeks to determine whether a theory-informed worksheet appended to feedback reports can help family physicians improve quality of care for their patients with diabetes and/or ischemic heart disease.
methodsTwo-arm cluster trial was conducted with participating primary care practices allocated using minimization to simple feedback or enhanced feedback group. The simple feedback group receives performance feedback reports every six months for two years regarding the proportion of their patients with diabetes and/or ischemic heart disease who are meeting quality targets. The enhanced feedback group receives these same reports as well as a theory-informed worksheet designed to facilitate goal setting and action plan development in response to the feedback reports. Participants are family physicians from across Ontario who use electronic medical records; data for rostered patients are used to produce the feedback reports and for analysis. OUTCOMES: The primary disease outcomes are the blood pressure (BP), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) levels. The primary process measure is a composite score indicating the number of recommended activities (e.g., tests and prescriptions) conducted by the family physicians for their patients with diabetes and/or ischemic heart disease within the appropriate timeframe. Secondary outcomes are the proportion of patients whose results meet targets for glucose, LDL, and BP as well as the percent of patients receiving relevant prescriptions. A qualitative process evaluation using semi-structured interviews will explore perceived barriers to behaviour change in response to feedback reports and preferences with regard to feedback design. ANALYSIS: Intention-to-treat approach will be used to analyze the trial. Analysis will be performed on patient-level variables using generalized estimating equation models to adjust for covariates and account for the clustered nature of the data. The trial is powered to show small, but clinically important differences of 7 mmHG in systolic BP and 0.32 mmol/L in LDL.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00996645.
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.