ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)
Auditing audits: use and development of the Oxfordshire Medical Audit Advisory Group rating system.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving detection of alcohol misuse in patients presenting to an accident and emergency department.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2001Article
- A survey of audit activity in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1998Article
- Adapting total quality management for general practice: evaluation of a programme.Quality in health care : QHC · 1996Article
- Assessing the work of medical audit advisory groups in promoting audit in general practice.Quality in health care : QHC · 1995Article
- An audit of ANCA in routine clinical practice.Postgraduate medical journal · 1995Article
- Assessing the quality of care.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1995Article
- Folic acid prescription in pregnancy.The Ulster medical journal · 1995Article
- Clinical audit: time for a reappraisal?Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of LondonReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the value of the Oxfordshire Medical Audit Advisory Group rating system in monitoring and stimulating audit activity, and to implement a development of the system.
designUse of the rating system for assessment of practice audits on three annual visits in Oxfordshire; development and use of an "audit grid" as a refinement of the system; questionnaire to all medical audit advisory groups in England and Wales.
settingAll 85 general practices in Oxfordshire; all 95 medical audit advisory groups in England and Wales.
main outcome measuresLevel of practices' audit activity as measured by rating scale and grid. Use of scale nationally together with perceptions of strengths and weaknesses as perceived by chairs of medical audit advisory groups.
resultsAfter one year Oxfordshire practices more than attained the target standards set in 1991, with 72% doing audit involving setting target standards or implementing change; by 1993 this had risen to 78%. Most audits were confined to chronic disease management, preventive care, and appointments. 38 of 92 medical audit advisory groups used the Oxfordshire group's rating scale. Its main weaknesses were insensitivity in assessing the quality of audits and failure to measure team involvement.
conclusionsThe rating system is effective educationally in helping practices improve and summatively for providing feedback to family health service authorities. The grid showed up weakness in the breadth of audit topics studied. IMPLICATIONS AND ACTION: Oxfordshire practices achieved targets set for 1991-2 but need to broaden the scope of their audits and the topics studied. The advisory group's targets for 1994-5 are for 50% of practices to achieve an audit in each of the areas of clinical care, access, communication, and professional values and for 80% of audits to include setting targets or implementing change.
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.