ArticleImplementation science : IS2022
Optimizing responsiveness to feedback about antibiotic prescribing in primary care: protocol for two interrelated randomized implementation trials with embedded process evaluations.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Do Peer-comparisons, Emphasis on Harms, and/or Inclusion of Viral Prescription Pad Resources Increase Responsiveness to Feedback About Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care (PHO Trial)
Do Peer-comparisons, Emphasis on Harms, and/or Inclusion of Viral Prescription Pad Resources Increase Responsiveness to Feedback About Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care: Protocol for Two Linked Trials With Embedded Process Evaluations (OH Trial)
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spillover From an Intervention on Antibiotic Prescribing for Family Physicians: A Post Hoc Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Process evaluation of two large randomized controlled trials to understand factors influencing family physicians' use of antibiotic audit and feedback reports.Implementation science : IS · 2024Trial
- Mailed feedback to primary care physicians on antibiotic prescribing for patients aged 65 years and older: pragmatic, factorial randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Trial
- Association Between Peer Comparison Feedback and Hospitalist Antibiotic Prescribing.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Regional and national antimicrobial stewardship activities: a survey from the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN).JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2023Article
- Moving the needle on dental antibiotic overuse in Canada post COVID-19.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAudit and feedback (A&F) that shows how health professionals compare to those of their peers, can be an effective intervention to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing among family physicians. However, the most impactful design approach to A&F to achieve this aim is uncertain. We will test three design modifications of antibiotic A&F that could be readily scaled and sustained if shown to be effective: (1) inclusion of case-mix-adjusted peer comparator versus a crude comparator, (2) emphasizing harms, rather than lack of benefits, and (3) providing a viral prescription pad.
methodsWe will conduct two interrelated pragmatic randomized trials in January 2021. One trial will include family physicians in Ontario who have signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report from Ontario Health ("OH Trial"). These physicians will be cluster-randomized by practice, 1:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will also receive a Viral Prescription Pad mailed to their office as well as added emphasis in their report on use of the pad. Ontario family physicians who have not signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report will be included in the other trial administered by Public Health Ontario ("PHO Trial"). These physicians will be allocated 4:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will be further randomized by two factors: case-mix adjusted versus unadjusted comparator and emphasis or not on harms of antibiotics. Physicians in the intervention arm of this trial will receive one of four versions of a personalized antibiotic A&F letter from PHO. For both trials, the primary outcome is the antibiotic prescribing rate per 1000 patient visits, measured at 6 months post-randomization, the primary analysis will use Poisson regression and we will follow the intention to treat principle. A mixed-methods process evaluation will use surveys and interviews with family physicians to explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects, exploring targeted constructs including intention, self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, descriptive norms, and goal prioritization. DISCUSSION: This protocol describes the rationale and methodology of two interrelated pragmatic trials testing variations of theory-informed components of an audit and feedback intervention to determine how to optimize A&F interventions for antibiotic prescribing in primary care.
trial registrationNCT04594200, NCT05044052. CIHR Grant ID: 398514.
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.