ArticleBMC family practice2011
Performance feedback: an exploratory study to examine the acceptability and impact for interdisciplinary primary care teams.
Article in BMC family practice, 2011. 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.
- Improving stroke prevention therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation in primary care: protocol for a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial.Implementation science : IS · 2016Trial
- Factors Influencing Team Performance: What Can Support Teams in High-Performance Sport Learn from Other Industries? A Systematic Scoping Review.Sports medicine - open · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of confidential reports to physicians on their prescribing of antipsychotic medications in nursing homes.Implementation science communications · 2020Article
- Measuring the performance of interprofessional primary health care teams: understanding the teams perspective.Primary health care research & development · 2019Article
- Measurement without management: qualitative evaluation of a voluntary audit & feedback intervention for primary care teams.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Clinical performance comparators in audit and feedback: a review of theory and evidence.Implementation science : IS · 2019Review
- Beyond quality improvement: exploring why primary care teams engage in a voluntary audit and feedback program.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Article
- "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
- Assessing methods for measurement of clinical outcomes and quality of care in primary care practices.BMC health services research · 2012Article
- Acceptability of participatory social network analysis for problem-solving in Australian Aboriginal health service partnerships.BMC health services research · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis mixed methods study was designed to explore the acceptability and impact of feedback of team performance data to primary care interdisciplinary teams.
methodsSeven interdisciplinary teams were offered a one-hour, facilitated performance feedback session presenting data from a comprehensive, previously-conducted evaluation, selecting highlights such as performance on chronic disease management, access, patient satisfaction and team function.
resultsSeveral recurrent themes emerged from participants' surveys and two rounds of interviews within three months of the feedback session. Team performance measurement and feedback was welcomed across teams and disciplines. This feedback could build the team, the culture, and the capacity for quality improvement. However, existing performance indicators do not equally reflect the role of different disciplines within an interdisciplinary team. Finally, the effect of team performance feedback on intentions to improve performance was hindered by a poor understanding of how the team could use the data.
conclusionsThe findings further our understanding of how performance feedback may engage interdisciplinary team members in improving the quality of primary care and the unique challenges specific to these settings. There is a need to develop a shared sense of responsibility and agenda for quality improvement. Therefore, more efforts to develop flexible and interactive performance-reporting structures (that better reflect contributions from all team members) in which teams could specify the information and audience may assist in promoting quality improvement.
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.