Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36471424›Full record

ArticleTrials2022

ANDA-Evaluating Facilitated Feedback Enhancement - a Cluster randomised Trial (ANDA-EFFECT): protocol for a cluster randomised trial of audit feedback augmented with education and support, compared to feedback alone, on acceptability, utility and health outcomes in diabetes centres in Australia.

Matthew Quigley, Arul Earnest, Sofianos Andrikopoulos, Natalie Wischer, Sally Green, Sophia Zoungas

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew QuigleySchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Arul EarnestSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Sofianos AndrikopoulosSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Natalie WischerSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Sally GreenSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Sophia ZoungasSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. sophia.zoungas@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2672-0949
Monash University · AUAustralian Diabetes Society · AUMonash Health · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople living with diabetes must manage a range of factors for optimal control of glycaemia and to minimise the risk of diabetes-related complications. Diabetes practitioners are expected to follow guidelines for the key process of care and clinical outcomes, to help people living with diabetes achieve clinical targets. In Australia, the performance of diabetes centres against guidelines is evaluated by the Australian National Diabetes Audit, an annual clinical audit and feedback activity. Previous work has identified areas for improvement in the feedback provided to participating diabetes centres and suggested additional educational and support resources to assist in using audit feedback for the development of quality improvement activities. This cluster randomised trial will test the acceptability, utility and impact on selected clinical outcomes of the developed study intervention (audit feedback and a tailored educational and peer support cointervention).

methodsTwo-armed cluster randomised trial with Australian Diabetes Centres that participated in the Australian National Diabetes Audit in 2021 as the clusters, stratified by location and type of centre. We aim to recruit 35 diabetes centres in each arm. Both the intervention and control arms will receive an augmented feedback report, accompanied by a partially pre-populated slide deck. In addition, the intervention arm will receive a tailored theory-based intervention designed to address identified, modifiable barriers to utilising and implementing the recommendations from diabetes audit feedback. The co-primary outcomes are (1) HbA1c at the patient level, measured at 6 months after delivery of the intervention, and (2) the acceptability and utility of the augmented feedback and cointerventions at the practitioner level, measured at 3 months after delivery of the intervention. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to test the effects of systematic development and implementation of theory and evidence-informed changes to the audit feedback delivered to diabetes centres participating in an established national clinical diabetes audit. Potential benefits of improved audit feedback include more optimal engagement with the feedback by end clinical users which, ultimately, may lead to improvements in care for people living with diabetes.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621000765820. Prospectively registered on June 21, 2021.

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseDiabetes MellitusAustraliaFeedbackHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicBlood GlucoseAudit and feedbackCluster randomised trialDiabetes mellitusEducationalFeedback interventionPeer support

Identifiers

PMID36471424
PMCPMC9720980
OpenAlexW4310680065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.