Trial reportCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes2011
Randomized trial of targeted performance feedback to facilitate quality improvement in acute myocardial infarction care.
Trial report in Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Use cases of registry-based randomized controlled trials-A review of the registries' contributions and constraints.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- Defining key design elements of registry-based randomised controlled trials: a scoping review.Trials · 2020Article
- Description of a multidisciplinary initiative to improve SCIP measures related to pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis compliance: a single-center success story.Patient safety in surgery · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEfforts to improve quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are a national priority. To date, there have been few studies that have prospectively evaluated hospital quality improvement (QI) interventions. METHODS AND
resultsUsing hospitals in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) ACTION Registry-GWTG, a cluster randomized trial of the effectiveness of targeted performance feedback to facilitate process improvement for AMI care will be conducted. ACTION Registry-GWTG hospitals with a minimum of 50 AMI patients per 2 quarters are eligible for randomization. The control arm receives standard performance feedback reports, and the intervention arm receives standard performance feedback reports in addition to a supplemental report on the "top 3" centrally identified, hospital-specific performance gaps. The primary outcome will be improvement in a composite of all metrics, and the secondary outcome will be improvement in the targeted metrics. At study inception in January 2009, 149 sites were randomized: 76 to the intervention arm, and 73 to the control arm. Intervention and control sites were well balanced in terms of baseline performance, center characteristics, and AMI volume (≈70 patients per quarter). The intervention phase will continue for 5 feedback cycles, each containing 2 quarters of data feedback over 18 months. A final trial outcome report will follow.
conclusionsThis randomized trial will evaluate a novel hospital-level QI intervention of targeted performance feedback for AMI, thereby demonstrating the effective use of national registries for QI and furthering our understanding of effective QI methods.
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.