UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Informing the research agenda for optimizing audit and feedback interventions: results of a prioritization exercise

Colquhoun, HL; Carroll, K; Eva, KW; Grimshaw, JM; Ivers, N; Michie, S; Brehaut, JC; (2021) Informing the research agenda for optimizing audit and feedback interventions: results of a prioritization exercise. BMC medical research methodology , 21 (1) , Article 20. 10.1186/s12874-020-01195-5. Green open access

[img]
Preview
Text
s12874-020-01195-5.pdf - Published version

Download (549kB) | Preview

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.

Type: Article
Title: Informing the research agenda for optimizing audit and feedback interventions: results of a prioritization exercise
Location: England
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-020-01195-5
Publisher version: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01195-5
Language: English
Additional information: This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Keywords: Audit and feedback, Implementation science, Knowledge translation, Research agenda, Theory
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Div of Psychology and Lang Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Div of Psychology and Lang Sciences > Clinical, Edu and Hlth Psychology
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10120162
Downloads since deposit
5Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item