Informing the research agenda for optimizing audit and feedback interventions: results of a prioritization exercise
Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | BMC medical research methodology Jg. 21; H. 1; S. 20 - 8 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
London
BioMed Central
13.01.2021
BioMed Central Ltd Springer Nature B.V BMC |
| Schlagworte: | |
| ISSN: | 1471-2288, 1471-2288 |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Abstract | Background
Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further.
Methods
From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 ‘priority’ hypotheses following the header “
A&F interventions will be more effective if…”
. Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped.
Results
68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… “
if feedback is provided by a trusted source”
; “
if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention”
; “
if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence”
; “
if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient”
; “
if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change”
; “
if it suggests clear action plans”
; and “
if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit”
. The most endorsed theme was
Recipient Priorities
(four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a ‘priority’ hypotheses).
Conclusions
This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further. Methods From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 'priority' hypotheses following the header "A&F interventions will be more effective if...". Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped. Results 68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective... "if feedback is provided by a trusted source"; "if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention"; "if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence"; "if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient"; "if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change"; "if it suggests clear action plans"; and "if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit". The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a 'priority' hypotheses). Conclusions This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. Keywords: Audit and feedback, Implementation science, Knowledge translation, Theory, Research agenda Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further. From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 'priority' hypotheses following the header "A&F interventions will be more effective if…". Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped. 68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… "if feedback is provided by a trusted source"; "if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention"; "if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence"; "if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient"; "if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change"; "if it suggests clear action plans"; and "if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit". The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a 'priority' hypotheses). This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. Abstract Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further. Methods From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 ‘priority’ hypotheses following the header “A&F interventions will be more effective if…”. Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped. Results 68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… “if feedback is provided by a trusted source”; “if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention”; “if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence”; “if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient”; “if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change”; “if it suggests clear action plans”; and “if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit”. The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a ‘priority’ hypotheses). Conclusions This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further.BACKGROUNDAudit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further.From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 'priority' hypotheses following the header "A&F interventions will be more effective if…". Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped.METHODSFrom the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 'priority' hypotheses following the header "A&F interventions will be more effective if…". Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped.68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… "if feedback is provided by a trusted source"; "if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention"; "if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence"; "if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient"; "if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change"; "if it suggests clear action plans"; and "if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit". The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a 'priority' hypotheses).RESULTS68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… "if feedback is provided by a trusted source"; "if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention"; "if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence"; "if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient"; "if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change"; "if it suggests clear action plans"; and "if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit". The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a 'priority' hypotheses).This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions.CONCLUSIONSThis work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further. From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 'priority' hypotheses following the header "A&F interventions will be more effective if...". Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped. 68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective... "if feedback is provided by a trusted source"; "if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention"; "if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence"; "if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient"; "if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change"; "if it suggests clear action plans"; and "if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit". The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a 'priority' hypotheses). This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further. Methods From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 ‘priority’ hypotheses following the header “A&F interventions will be more effective if…”. Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped. Results 68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… “if feedback is provided by a trusted source”; “if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention”; “if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence”; “if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient”; “if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change”; “if it suggests clear action plans”; and “if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit”. The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a ‘priority’ hypotheses). Conclusions This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further. Methods From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 ‘priority’ hypotheses following the header “ A&F interventions will be more effective if…” . Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped. Results 68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… “ if feedback is provided by a trusted source” ; “ if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention” ; “ if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence” ; “ if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient” ; “ if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change” ; “ if it suggests clear action plans” ; and “ if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit” . The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a ‘priority’ hypotheses). Conclusions This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions. |
| ArticleNumber | 20 |
| Audience | Academic |
| Author | Eva, Kevin W. Brehaut, Jamie C. Ivers, Noah Colquhoun, Heather L. Michie, Susan Carroll, Kelly Grimshaw, Jeremy M. |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Heather L. orcidid: 0000-0002-6226-2511 surname: Colquhoun fullname: Colquhoun, Heather L. email: heather.colquhoun@utoronto.ca organization: Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto – sequence: 2 givenname: Kelly surname: Carroll fullname: Carroll, Kelly organization: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Centre for Practice Changing Research, The Ottawa Hospital – sequence: 3 givenname: Kevin W. surname: Eva fullname: Eva, Kevin W. organization: Centre for Health Education Scholarship, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia – sequence: 4 givenname: Jeremy M. surname: Grimshaw fullname: Grimshaw, Jeremy M. organization: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Centre for Practice Changing Research, The Ottawa Hospital, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa – sequence: 5 givenname: Noah surname: Ivers fullname: Ivers, Noah organization: Department of Family Medicine, Women’s College Hospital – sequence: 6 givenname: Susan surname: Michie fullname: Michie, Susan organization: Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London – sequence: 7 givenname: Jamie C. surname: Brehaut fullname: Brehaut, Jamie C. organization: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Centre for Practice Changing Research, The Ottawa Hospital, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33435873$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNp9kktv3CAUha0qVfNo_0AXFVI33TgFjA3uolIU9TFSpG6yRxiuPUxtmAKO2vz64pmkyURV5AUW95wPLvecFkfOOyiKtwSfEyKaj5FQwVmJKS4xIW1d1i-KE8I4KSkV4ujR_3FxGuMGY8JF1bwqjquKVbXg1UkRV673YbJuQGkNKEAEFfQaqQGcUSjXkN8mO9nbRaJmYxNSzqAewHRK_0TWJQg34JL1Ln5aAPOYIvI9UmgbrA822Vu1VBH8hqBthNfFy16NEd7crWfF9dcv15ffy6sf31aXF1elbjBPJe3aptat6Zsec91pRmiLielEryomuCYKa66ZIEIzXSvVVZQIpgmtO2GMrs6K1R5rvNrIfJdJhT_SKyt3Gz4MUoVk9QiyZR3jQmmKKWetIRkGvAbSKADMFc2sz3vWdu4mMDr3G9R4AD2sOLuWg7-RXOCa8CYDPtwBgv81Q0xyslHDOCoHfo6SMp5PFnmeWfr-iXTj5-DySy0qwTnBbf2gGlRuwOYp5nP1ApUXTV01vCV0YZ3_R5U_A5PVOU69zfsHhnePG_3X4X1iskDsBTr4GAP0Utu0m28m21ESLJdwyn04ZQ6n3IVTLlemT6z39GdN1d4Us9gNEB5e4xnXXzCb96s |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1186_s13012_023_01318_8 crossref_primary_10_1097_CEH_0000000000000454 crossref_primary_10_2196_33531 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10488_022_01191_5 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjoq_2022_002006 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_023_09402_x crossref_primary_10_2196_38736 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13012_023_01320_0 crossref_primary_10_1097_NCQ_0000000000000588 crossref_primary_10_1177_26334895221135263 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjopen_2022_062688 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13012_024_01365_9 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13643_022_02026_y crossref_primary_10_1186_s13012_021_01098_z crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_023_09334_6 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1007/s11606-014-2913-y 10.1186/1748-5908-8-66 10.1186/s13012-017-0646-0 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008355 10.1186/1748-5908-9-24 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34 10.7326/M15-2248 10.1186/s13012-015-0282-5 10.1186/s12874-016-0210-7 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | The Author(s) 2021 COPYRIGHT 2021 BioMed Central Ltd. 2021. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: The Author(s) 2021 – notice: COPYRIGHT 2021 BioMed Central Ltd. – notice: 2021. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| DBID | C6C AAYXX CITATION NPM 3V. 7X7 7XB 88E 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BENPR CCPQU DWQXO FYUFA GHDGH K9. M0S M1P PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI 7X8 5PM DOA |
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-020-01195-5 |
| DatabaseName | SpringerOpen Free (Free internet resource, activated by CARLI) CrossRef PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) Hospital Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Essentials - QC ProQuest Central ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Korea Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition) Medical Database Proquest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic (New) Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic (retired) ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest Central ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Korea Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | PubMed MEDLINE - Academic Publicly Available Content Database |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: PIMPY name: Publicly Available Content Database url: http://search.proquest.com/publiccontent sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1471-2288 |
| EndPage | 8 |
| ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_94b478ac202749d1aabe75e16aee07a2 PMC7805176 A653679124 33435873 10_1186_s12874_020_01195_5 |
| Genre | Journal Article |
| GeographicLocations | Canada |
| GeographicLocations_xml | – name: Canada |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CA) grantid: 130354 – fundername: ; grantid: 130354 |
| GroupedDBID | --- 0R~ 23N 2WC 53G 5VS 6J9 6PF 7X7 88E 8FI 8FJ AAFWJ AAJSJ AASML AAWTL ABDBF ABUWG ACGFO ACGFS ACIHN ACUHS ADBBV ADRAZ ADUKV AEAQA AENEX AFKRA AFPKN AHBYD AHMBA AHYZX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMKLP AMTXH AOIJS BAPOH BAWUL BCNDV BENPR BFQNJ BMC BPHCQ BVXVI C6C CCPQU CS3 DIK DU5 E3Z EAD EAP EAS EBD EBLON EBS EMB EMK EMOBN ESX F5P FYUFA GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 HMCUK IAO IHR INH INR ITC KQ8 M1P M48 MK0 M~E O5R O5S OK1 OVT P2P PGMZT PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PJZUB PPXIY PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PUEGO RBZ RNS ROL RPM RSV SMD SOJ SV3 TR2 TUS UKHRP W2D WOQ WOW XSB AAYXX AFFHD CITATION -A0 3V. ACRMQ ADINQ ALIPV C24 NPM 7XB 8FK AZQEC DWQXO K9. PKEHL PQEST PQUKI 7X8 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c607t-2b965c9df6f07cbc412901db8fa3487c1a0c7c4818c4c5aab32184c125b8ddc3 |
| IEDL.DBID | RSV |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 16 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000609492700001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1471-2288 |
| IngestDate | Fri Oct 03 12:51:37 EDT 2025 Tue Nov 04 02:01:24 EST 2025 Fri Sep 05 13:19:40 EDT 2025 Tue Oct 07 05:35:00 EDT 2025 Tue Nov 11 10:29:11 EST 2025 Tue Nov 04 18:07:10 EST 2025 Thu Jan 02 22:57:10 EST 2025 Sat Nov 29 06:38:59 EST 2025 Tue Nov 18 22:30:30 EST 2025 Sat Sep 06 07:35:33 EDT 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 1 |
| Keywords | Research agenda Theory Audit and feedback Knowledge translation Implementation science |
| Language | English |
| License | Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c607t-2b965c9df6f07cbc412901db8fa3487c1a0c7c4818c4c5aab32184c125b8ddc3 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-6226-2511 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://link.springer.com/10.1186/s12874-020-01195-5 |
| PMID | 33435873 |
| PQID | 2478771095 |
| PQPubID | 42579 |
| PageCount | 8 |
| ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_94b478ac202749d1aabe75e16aee07a2 pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7805176 proquest_miscellaneous_2477498874 proquest_journals_2478771095 gale_infotracmisc_A653679124 gale_infotracacademiconefile_A653679124 pubmed_primary_33435873 crossref_citationtrail_10_1186_s12874_020_01195_5 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12874_020_01195_5 springer_journals_10_1186_s12874_020_01195_5 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2021-01-13 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2021-01-13 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 01 year: 2021 text: 2021-01-13 day: 13 |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationPlace | London |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: London – name: England |
| PublicationTitle | BMC medical research methodology |
| PublicationTitleAbbrev | BMC Med Res Methodol |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | BMC Med Res Methodol |
| PublicationYear | 2021 |
| Publisher | BioMed Central BioMed Central Ltd Springer Nature B.V BMC |
| Publisher_xml | – name: BioMed Central – name: BioMed Central Ltd – name: Springer Nature B.V – name: BMC |
| References | A Boivin (1195_CR10) 2014; 9 NM Ivers (1195_CR2) 2014; 29 J Grimshaw (1195_CR7) 2019; 28 NM Rankin (1195_CR9) 2016; 16 G Eysenbach (1195_CR6) 2004; 6 HL Colquhoun (1195_CR3) 2013; 8 JC Brehaut (1195_CR5) 2016; 164 HL Colquhoun (1195_CR4) 2017; 12 N Ivers (1195_CR1) 2012; 6 K Newman (1195_CR8) 2015; 10 |
| References_xml | – volume: 29 start-page: 1534 issue: 11 year: 2014 ident: 1195_CR2 publication-title: J Gen Intern Med doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2913-y – volume: 8 start-page: 66 year: 2013 ident: 1195_CR3 publication-title: Implementation Sci doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-66 – volume: 12 start-page: 117 issue: 1 year: 2017 ident: 1195_CR4 publication-title: Implement Sci doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0646-0 – volume: 28 start-page: 416 issue: 5 year: 2019 ident: 1195_CR7 publication-title: BMJ Qual Saf doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008355 – volume: 9 start-page: 24 issue: 1 year: 2014 ident: 1195_CR10 publication-title: Implement Sci doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-24 – volume: 6 start-page: CD000259 year: 2012 ident: 1195_CR1 publication-title: Cochrane Database Syst Rev – volume: 6 start-page: e34 issue: 3 year: 2004 ident: 1195_CR6 publication-title: J Med Internet Res doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34 – volume: 164 start-page: 435 year: 2016 ident: 1195_CR5 publication-title: Ann Intern Med doi: 10.7326/M15-2248 – volume: 10 start-page: 92 issue: 1 year: 2015 ident: 1195_CR8 publication-title: Implement Sci doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0282-5 – volume: 16 start-page: 110 issue: 1 year: 2016 ident: 1195_CR9 publication-title: BMC Med Res Methodol doi: 10.1186/s12874-016-0210-7 |
| SSID | ssj0017836 |
| Score | 2.3810592 |
| Snippet | Background
Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more... Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F... Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more... Abstract Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to... |
| SourceID | doaj pubmedcentral proquest gale pubmed crossref springer |
| SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 20 |
| SubjectTerms | Audit and feedback Exercise Feedback Feedback (Psychology) Health care Health Sciences Hypotheses Implementation science Intervention Knowledge translation Medical research Medicine Medicine & Public Health Research agenda Research Article Research methodology Statistical Theory and Methods Statistics for Life Sciences Study design Surveys Theory Theory of Medicine/Bioethics |
| SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3Nb9UwDI_QhBAXNL4LAwUJiQNEa9o0abgNxMSFicMOu0WJm2pPjHZa3-Owvx47bR-vQ8CFa_Mhx3Ecu7F_Zuy1Cm0bqmiFiaEWSnkrglFBFCpGG3QwOahUbMKcnNRnZ_brTqkvigkb4YFHxh1aFZSpCUgQ_SfbSO9DNFWU2seYG5-0L1o9szM1vR9QbsKcIlPrw0ESrLsgVylhnIlqcQ0ltP7fdfLOpXQzYPLGq2m6jI732b3JiuRHI_X32a3YPWB3vkzv5A_ZMGYZ4ViOBh6fEH3OOSoPdME5tvEedcX31TV18ZSZwX3X8BbvsuDhG1_thEIO72mCzcV64H3LPUeaeoJCGhM4-Vy06RE7Pf50-vGzmMorCNC5WYsiWF2BbVrd5gYCKPolJZtQt75ENwakz8GAwhsdFFTI95LcQUCLKNRNA-Vjttf1XXzKuPcWYo0TleBVbKS1vkLZ0EGiwQGmyJicme1ggh6nChgXLrkgtXbjBjncIJc2yFUZe7sdczkCb_y19wfaw21PAs1OH1CU3CRK7l-ilLE3JAGOjjaSB37KUMBFEkiWO9JVqY1FiyhjB4ueeCRh2TzLkJtUwuAKgkGiyFck9tW2mUZSmFsX-03qg5Sh3scpnowit11SWaJlW5syY2YhjIs1L1u61XkCDKe6FdLojL2bxfYXWX_m6bP_wdPn7G5BUUC5FLI8YHvrq018wW7Dj_VquHqZDu1PaeRG8w priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – databaseName: ProQuest Central dbid: BENPR link: http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3Nb9UwDI_gDaFd-GYUBgoSEgeI1rRp0nBBG9rEhacJ7bBblKQpe2K04_U9Dvz12G36tg6xC9cmTePacezE_pmQN8LVtSuCZiq4kglhNXNKOJaJELSTTqVe9MUm1Hxenp7q43jg1sWwylEn9oq6aj2eke9liCKDgYPFx4ufDKtG4e1qLKFxm2whUpmYka2Dw_nx1809AuYojKkypdzrOMK7M3SZeqwzVky2ox61_2_dfGVzuh44ee32tN-Uju7_LzkPyL1ojtL9QX4ekluheUTufokX7o9JN6QrwccpWIo0QgOdUdBC4MtTaKMtKJ0fi9_YxWKKB7VNRWvYFJ313-niSkxl9wEHWJ-vOtrW1FIgqkVMpSETlI7Vn56Qk6PDk0-fWazTwLxM1YplTsvC66qWdaq88wLPtnjlytrm4A95blOvvADTwAtfWOty9Cs9mFaurCqfPyWzpm3CM0Kt1T6UMFDurQgV19oWIGTScbBcvMoSwkduGR8xzLGUxrnpfZlSmoHDBjhseg6bIiHvNu9cDAgeN_Y-QCHY9ET07f5Bu_xm4mI2WjhgH4Jbgk-vKw4kBVUELm0IqbIwzbcoQgZ1BEzP25jqAEQi2pbZl0UulQbTKiG7k56wtv20eZQeE3VLZy5FJyGvN834JsbLNaFd931gZrCBwBA7g8xuSMpzMJFLlSdETaR5QvO0pVmc9cjjWACDK5mQ96PcX07r3__0-c1UvCDbGQYKpZzxfJfMVst1eEnu-F-rRbd8FVf0H87AVg0 priority: 102 providerName: ProQuest |
| Title | Informing the research agenda for optimizing audit and feedback interventions: results of a prioritization exercise |
| URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-020-01195-5 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33435873 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2478771095 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2477498874 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC7805176 https://doaj.org/article/94b478ac202749d1aabe75e16aee07a2 |
| Volume | 21 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000609492700001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVADU databaseName: BioMed Central Open Access Free customDbUrl: eissn: 1471-2288 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017836 issn: 1471-2288 databaseCode: RBZ dateStart: 20010101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.biomedcentral.com/search/ providerName: BioMedCentral – providerCode: PRVAON databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals customDbUrl: eissn: 1471-2288 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017836 issn: 1471-2288 databaseCode: DOA dateStart: 20010101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.doaj.org/ providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – providerCode: PRVHPJ databaseName: ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources customDbUrl: eissn: 1471-2288 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017836 issn: 1471-2288 databaseCode: M~E dateStart: 20010101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://road.issn.org providerName: ISSN International Centre – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Health & Medical Collection customDbUrl: eissn: 1471-2288 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017836 issn: 1471-2288 databaseCode: 7X7 dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/healthcomplete providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: ProQuest Central customDbUrl: eissn: 1471-2288 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017836 issn: 1471-2288 databaseCode: BENPR dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.proquest.com/central providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Publicly Available Content Database customDbUrl: eissn: 1471-2288 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017836 issn: 1471-2288 databaseCode: PIMPY dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: http://search.proquest.com/publiccontent providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVAVX databaseName: SpringerLINK Contemporary 1997-Present customDbUrl: eissn: 1471-2288 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017836 issn: 1471-2288 databaseCode: RSV dateStart: 20011201 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://link.springer.com/search?facet-content-type=%22Journal%22 providerName: Springer Nature |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1Lb9QwELZoixAX3o-FsjISEgeIiDeOH9xa1AoOXa1KhZaTZTsOXdEm1WaXA7-eGSdZmvKQ4LJS1mNr7IznEc98JuQFd2Xp8qATGZxKOLc6cZK7ZMJD0E44mXoeL5uQ06maz_WsKwpr-mz3_kgyauq4rZV40zCEZk8w3Ik4ZUm-RXbA3CncjscfP23ODrAuoS-P-W2_gQmKSP2_6uNLBulqsuSVE9NoiA5v_98U7pBbneNJ91pJuUuuheoeuXHUHa3fJ01bmATDUfAJaQcCdEpB30DUTqGN1qBezhffkcRiMQe1VUFLMH_O-q90cSl7snmLA6zPVg2tS2opsFkjelJb80n7e54ekJPDg5N375PuRobEi1SukonTIve6KEWZSu88x69YrHCqtBlEPp7Z1EvPwQnw3OfWugwjSA9OlFNF4bOHZLuqq_CYUGu1DwoGyrzloWBa2xzESTgGPoqXkxFh_TsyvkMrx0szzkyMWpQw7WIaWEwTF9PkI_Jq0-eixer4K_U-vvoNJeJsxz_q5RfTbVujueNSIYwlRO-6YDClIPPAhA0hlRbYfImCY1AbAHvedkUNMEnE1TJ7Is-E1OBEjcjugBJ2sR8296JnOi3SmAkiJ2GyLDD7fNOMPTEzrgr1OtIAZ2AqYIhHraRuppRl4AwrmY2IHMjwYM7DlmpxGjHG8aoLJsWIvO4l-Sdbf17TJ_9G_pTcnGCKUMoSlu2S7dVyHZ6R6_7batEsx2RLzmX8VWOys38wnR2P4ycTeJp9OJp9Hsd9_wOphlDM |
| linkProvider | Springer Nature |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V1Lb9QwELbKFgEX3o9AASOBOEDUPBw7RkKoPKqu2l3tYQ_tybIdh64oSdnsguA_8R-ZyWPbFNFbD1zXjuXxfvNwMvMNIc-ZyXOTOOkLZ1KfMS19I5jxI-acNNyIwLK62YQYj9P9fTlZI7-7WhhMq-xsYm2os9LiO_LNCFlkMHEweXf8zceuUfh1tWuh0cBi1_38AVe26u3wI_y_L6Jo-9P0w47fdhXwLQ_Ewo-M5ImVWc7zQFhjGb6JCTOT5jqG6N2GOrDCMnBkltlEaxPjLchCIGDSLLMxLHuJrDPAejog65PhaHKw-myBJRFdZU7KN6sQ2eR9vKHV1Gp-0vN-dZOAv13BKV94Nk_zzMfa2gdu3_jPTu8mud4G23Sr0Y5bZM0Vt8mVUZtOcIdUTTEWyEohDqYt8dEhBRtbZJrCGC3BpH6d_cIpGgtYqC4ymoPLN9p-obNTGaPVG1xgebSoaJlTTeEMS2SMaupcadfb6i6ZXoTE98igKAv3gFCtpXUpLBRbzVwWSqkTUCFuQojLrIg8EnbgULZlaMdGIUeqvqmlXDWAUgAoVQNKJR55tXrmuOEnOXf2e8TcaiZyi9c_lPPPqjVVSjIDaEHqzkgwmYUgkhOJC7l2LhAatvkSEavQAsL2rG4LOUBI5BJTWzyJuZAQOHpkozcTLJftD3dgVa3lrNQJUj3ybDWMT2I2YOHKZT0HdgbuEZa436jISqQ4hgtAKmKPiJ7y9GTujxSzw5pXHdt7hIJ75HWnZifb-veZPjxfiqfk6s50tKf2huPdR-RahClRQeiH8QYZLOZL95hctt8Xs2r-pDUmlKgLVsA_MYizMA |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1Lb9QwELagoIoL70eggJGQOEDUOHHsmFt5rEDAqhIV6s2yHYeu2ibVJsuBX8-Mkyyb8pAQ1_XYGjvjeaxnviHkKbdVZXOvYultEXNuVGwlt3HKvVdWWJk4HppNyPm8ODxU-xtV_CHbfXyS7GsaEKWp7nbPyqq_4oXYbRnCtMcY-gTMsji_SC5xbBqE8frnL-t3BKxRGEtlfjtvYo4Cav-vunnDOJ1PnDz3ehqM0uza_2_nOrk6OKR0r5egG-SCr2-S7U_Dk_st0vYFS7A0BV-RDuBARxT0EETzFMZoA2rndPEdSQwWeVBTl7QCs2iNO6aLjazK9iUusDrpWtpU1FBguUFUpb4WlI79n26Tg9nbg9fv4qFTQ-xEIrs4tUrkTpWVqBLprOP47xYrbVGZDCIix0zipOPgHDjucmNshpGlA-fKFmXpsjtkq25qf49QY5TzBSyUOcN9yZQyOYiZsPBxmZNpRNj4vbQbUMyxmcaJDtFMIXR_mBoOU4fD1HlEnq_nnPUYHn-lfoVisKZE_O3wQ7P8qofrrBW3XBYIbwlRvSoZbMnL3DNhvE-kATafoRBp1BLAnjNDsQNsEvG29J7IMyEVOFcR2ZlQwu120-FRDPWgXVqdIqISJtECs0_WwzgTM-Zq36wCDXAGJgSWuNtL7XpLWQZOciGziMiJPE_2PB2pF0cBexxbYDApIvJilOqfbP35TO__G_ljsr3_ZqY_vp9_eECupJhFlLCYZTtkq1uu_ENy2X3rFu3yUbjsPwBGj1aE |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Informing+the+research+agenda+for+optimizing+audit+and+feedback+interventions%3A+results+of+a+prioritization+exercise&rft.jtitle=BMC+medical+research+methodology&rft.au=Colquhoun%2C+Heather+L&rft.au=Carroll%2C+Kelly&rft.au=Eva%2C+Kevin+W&rft.au=Grimshaw%2C+Jeremy+M&rft.date=2021-01-13&rft.pub=BioMed+Central+Ltd&rft.issn=1471-2288&rft.eissn=1471-2288&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186%2Fs12874-020-01195-5&rft.externalDocID=A653679124 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1471-2288&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1471-2288&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1471-2288&client=summon |