ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1998
A survey of audit activity in general practice.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Quality and Outcomes Framework: too early for a final verdict.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2007Article
- Morbidity and mortality audits: "How to"for family practice.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2005Article
- General practice: continuous quality improvement since 1948.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002Article
- Clinical governance in Scotland: an educational model.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002Article
- A model for clinical governance in primary care groups.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1999Article
- Audit activity.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1998Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byAudit activity.1998
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince 1991, all general practices have been encouraged to undertake clinical audit. Audit groups report that participation is high, and some local surveys have been undertaken, but no detailed national survey has been reported.
aimTo determine audit activities in general practices and the perceptions of general practitioners (GPs) regarding the future of clinical audit in primary care.
methodA questionnaire on audit activities was sent to 707 practices from 18 medical audit advisory group areas. The audit groups had been ranked by annual funding from 1992 to 1995. Six groups were selected at random from the top, middle, and lowest thirds of this rank order.
resultsA total of 428 (60.5%) usable responses were received. Overall, 346 (85%) responders reported 125.7 audits from the previous year with a median of three audits per practice. There was no correlation between the number of audits reported and the funding per GP for the medical audit advisory group. Of 997 audits described in detail, changes were reported as 'not needed' in 220 (22%), 'not made' in 142 (14%), 'made' in 439 (44%), and 'made and remeasured' in 196 (20%). Thus, 635 (64%) audits were reported to have led to changes. Some 853 (81%) of the topics identified were on clinical care. Responders made 242 (42%) positive comments on the future of clinical audit in primary care, and 152 (26%) negative views were recorded.
conclusionThe level of audit activity in general practice is reasonably high, and most of the audits result in change. The number of audits per practice seems to be independent of the level of funding that the medical audit advisory group has received. Although there is room for improvement in the levels of effective audit activity in general practice, continued support by the professionally led audit groups could enable all practices to undertake effective audit that leads to improvement in patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
9624769PMC1409969What 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.