schliessen

Filtern

 

Bibliotheken

Advancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses.(Report)

Background Audit and feedback (AF) is a common strategy for helping health providers to implement evidence into practice. Despite being extensively studied, health care AF interventions remain variably effective, with overall effect sizes that have not improved since 2003. Contributing to this stagn... Full description

Journal Title: Implementation Science Sept 29, 2017, Vol.12(1)
Main Author: Colquhoun, Heather L.
Other Authors: Carroll, Kelly , Eva, Kevin W. , Grimshaw, Jeremy M. , Ivers, Noah , Michie, Susan , Sales, Anne , Brehaut, Jamie C.
Format: Electronic Article Electronic Article
Language: English
Subjects:
ID: ISSN: 1748-5908 ; DOI: 10.1186/s13012-017-0646-0
Zum Text:
SendSend as email Add to Book BagAdd to Book Bag
Staff View
recordid: gale_ofa507903266
title: Advancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses.(Report)
format: Article
creator:
  • Colquhoun, Heather L.
  • Carroll, Kelly
  • Eva, Kevin W.
  • Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
  • Ivers, Noah
  • Michie, Susan
  • Sales, Anne
  • Brehaut, Jamie C.
subjects:
  • Evidence-Based Medicine – Methods
  • Feedback (Communication) – Methods
  • Feedback (Communication) – Testing
  • Health Care Industry – Accounting and Auditing
  • Health Care Industry – Services
ispartof: Implementation Science, Sept 29, 2017, Vol.12(1)
description: Background Audit and feedback (AF) is a common strategy for helping health providers to implement evidence into practice. Despite being extensively studied, health care AF interventions remain variably effective, with overall effect sizes that have not improved since 2003. Contributing to this stagnation is the fact that most health care AF interventions have largely been designed without being informed by theoretical understanding from the behavioral and social sciences. To determine if the trend can be improved, the objective of this study was to develop a list of testable, theory-informed hypotheses about how to design more effective AF interventions. Methods Using purposive sampling, semi-structured 60-90-min telephone interviews were conducted with experts in theories related to AF from a range of fields (e.g., cognitive, health and organizational psychology, medical decision-making, economics). Guided by detailed descriptions of AF interventions from the health care literature, interviewees described how they would approach the problem of designing improved AF interventions. Specific, theory-informed hypotheses about the conditions for effective design and delivery of AF interventions were elicited from the interviews. The resulting hypotheses were assigned by three coders working independently into themes, and categories of themes, in an iterative process. Results We conducted 28 interviews and identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, which were placed into 30 themes. The 30 themes included hypotheses related to the following five categories: AF recipient (seven themes), content of the AF (ten themes), process of delivery of the AF (six themes), behavior that was the focus of the AF (three themes), and other (four themes). Conclusions We have identified a set of testable, theory-informed hypotheses from a broad range of behavioral and social science that suggest conditions for more effective AF interventions. This work demonstrates the breadth of perspectives about AF from non-healthcare-specific disciplines in a way that yields testable hypotheses for healthcare AF interventions. These results will serve as the foundation for further work seeking to set research priorities among the AF research community. Keywords: Audit and feedback, Implementation science, Knowledge translation, Theory
language: eng
source:
identifier: ISSN: 1748-5908 ; DOI: 10.1186/s13012-017-0646-0
fulltext: fulltext
issn:
  • 1748-5908
  • 17485908
url: Link


@attributes
ID39330688
RANK0.07
NO1
SEARCH_ENGINEprimo_central_multiple_fe
SEARCH_ENGINE_TYPEPrimo Central Search Engine
LOCALfalse
PrimoNMBib
record
control
sourcerecordid507903266
sourceidgale_ofa
recordidTN_gale_ofa507903266
sourceformatXML
sourcesystemOther
pqid1946883010
galeid507903266
display
typearticle
titleAdvancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses.(Report)
creatorColquhoun, Heather L. ; Carroll, Kelly ; Eva, Kevin W. ; Grimshaw, Jeremy M. ; Ivers, Noah ; Michie, Susan ; Sales, Anne ; Brehaut, Jamie C.
ispartofImplementation Science, Sept 29, 2017, Vol.12(1)
identifierISSN: 1748-5908 ; DOI: 10.1186/s13012-017-0646-0
subjectEvidence-Based Medicine – Methods ; Feedback (Communication) – Methods ; Feedback (Communication) – Testing ; Health Care Industry – Accounting and Auditing ; Health Care Industry – Services
descriptionBackground Audit and feedback (AF) is a common strategy for helping health providers to implement evidence into practice. Despite being extensively studied, health care AF interventions remain variably effective, with overall effect sizes that have not improved since 2003. Contributing to this stagnation is the fact that most health care AF interventions have largely been designed without being informed by theoretical understanding from the behavioral and social sciences. To determine if the trend can be improved, the objective of this study was to develop a list of testable, theory-informed hypotheses about how to design more effective AF interventions. Methods Using purposive sampling, semi-structured 60-90-min telephone interviews were conducted with experts in theories related to AF from a range of fields (e.g., cognitive, health and organizational psychology, medical decision-making, economics). Guided by detailed descriptions of AF interventions from the health care literature, interviewees described how they would approach the problem of designing improved AF interventions. Specific, theory-informed hypotheses about the conditions for effective design and delivery of AF interventions were elicited from the interviews. The resulting hypotheses were assigned by three coders working independently into themes, and categories of themes, in an iterative process. Results We conducted 28 interviews and identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, which were placed into 30 themes. The 30 themes included hypotheses related to the following five categories: AF recipient (seven themes), content of the AF (ten themes), process of delivery of the AF (six themes), behavior that was the focus of the AF (three themes), and other (four themes). Conclusions We have identified a set of testable, theory-informed hypotheses from a broad range of behavioral and social science that suggest conditions for more effective AF interventions. This work demonstrates the breadth of perspectives about AF from non-healthcare-specific disciplines in a way that yields testable hypotheses for healthcare AF interventions. These results will serve as the foundation for further work seeking to set research priorities among the AF research community. Keywords: Audit and feedback, Implementation science, Knowledge translation, Theory
languageeng
source
version7
lds50peer_reviewed
links
openurl$$Topenurl_article
openurlfulltext$$Topenurlfull_article
search
scope
0gale_onefilea
1OneFile
creatorcontrib
0Colquhoun, Heather L
1Carroll, Kelly
2Eva, Kevin W
3Grimshaw, Jeremy M
4Ivers, Noah
5Michie, Susan
6Sales, Anne
7Brehaut, Jamie C
titleAdvancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses.(Report)
descriptionBackground Audit and feedback (AF) is a common strategy for helping health providers to implement evidence into practice. Despite being extensively studied, health care AF interventions remain variably effective, with overall effect sizes that have not improved since 2003. Contributing to this stagnation is the fact that most health care AF interventions have largely been designed without being informed by theoretical understanding from the behavioral and social sciences. To determine if the trend can be improved, the objective of this study was to develop a list of testable, theory-informed hypotheses about how to design more effective AF interventions. Methods Using purposive sampling, semi-structured 60-90-min telephone interviews were conducted with experts in theories related to AF from a range of fields (e.g., cognitive, health and organizational psychology, medical decision-making, economics). Guided by detailed descriptions of AF interventions from the health care literature, interviewees described how they would approach the problem of designing improved AF interventions. Specific, theory-informed hypotheses about the conditions for effective design and delivery of AF interventions were elicited from the interviews. The resulting hypotheses were assigned by three coders working independently into themes, and categories of themes, in an iterative process. Results We conducted 28 interviews and identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, which were placed into 30 themes. The 30 themes included hypotheses related to the following five categories: AF recipient (seven themes), content of the AF (ten themes), process of delivery of the AF (six themes), behavior that was the focus of the AF (three themes), and other (four themes). Conclusions We have identified a set of testable, theory-informed hypotheses from a broad range of behavioral and social science that suggest conditions for more effective AF interventions. This work demonstrates the breadth of perspectives about AF from non-healthcare-specific disciplines in a way that yields testable hypotheses for healthcare AF interventions. These results will serve as the foundation for further work seeking to set research priorities among the AF research community. Keywords: Audit and feedback, Implementation science, Knowledge translation, Theory
subject
0Evidence-based medicine–Methods
1Feedback (Communication)–Methods
2Feedback (Communication)–Testing
3Health care industry–Accounting and auditing
4Health care industry–Services
58000
6HEALTH SERVICES
7Health care industry
general
010.1186/s13012-017-0646-0
1English
2BioMed Central Ltd.
3Cengage Learning, Inc.
sourceidgale_ofa
recordidgale_ofa507903266
issn
01748-5908
117485908
rsrctypearticle
creationdate2017
startdate20170929
enddate20170929
recordtypearticle
addtitleImplementation Science
searchscopeOneFile
citationvol 12 issue 1
lsr30VSR-Enriched:[pqid, pages, galeid]
sort
titleAdvancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses.(Report)
authorColquhoun, Heather L. ; Carroll, Kelly ; Eva, Kevin W. ; Grimshaw, Jeremy M. ; Ivers, Noah ; Michie, Susan ; Sales, Anne ; Brehaut, Jamie C.
creationdate20170929
lso0120170929
facets
frbrgroupid5433509086170729702
frbrtype5
newrecords20171017
languageeng
creationdate2017
topic
0Evidence-Based Medicine–Methods
1Feedback (Communication)–Methods
2Feedback (Communication)–Testing
3Health Care Industry–Accounting and Auditing
4Health Care Industry–Services
collectionOneFile (GALE)
prefilterarticles
rsrctypearticles
creatorcontrib
0Colquhoun, Heather L.
1Carroll, Kelly
2Eva, Kevin W.
3Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
4Ivers, Noah
5Michie, Susan
6Sales, Anne
7Brehaut, Jamie C.
jtitleImplementation Science
toplevelpeer_reviewed
delivery
delcategoryRemote Search Resource
fulltextfulltext
addata
aulast
0Colquhoun
1Carroll
2Eva
3Grimshaw
4Ivers
5Michie
6Sales
7Brehaut
aufirst
0Heather L.
1Kelly
2Kevin W.
3Jeremy M.
4Noah
5Susan
6Anne
7Jamie C.
au
0Colquhoun, Heather L.
1Carroll, Kelly
2Eva, Kevin W.
3Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
4Ivers, Noah
5Michie, Susan
6Sales, Anne
7Brehaut, Jamie C.
atitleAdvancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses.
jtitleImplementation Science
risdate20170929
volume12
issue1
issn1748-5908
formatjournal
genrearticle
ristypeJOUR
abstractBackground Audit and feedback (AF) is a common strategy for helping health providers to implement evidence into practice. Despite being extensively studied, health care AF interventions remain variably effective, with overall effect sizes that have not improved since 2003. Contributing to this stagnation is the fact that most health care AF interventions have largely been designed without being informed by theoretical understanding from the behavioral and social sciences. To determine if the trend can be improved, the objective of this study was to develop a list of testable, theory-informed hypotheses about how to design more effective AF interventions. Methods Using purposive sampling, semi-structured 60-90-min telephone interviews were conducted with experts in theories related to AF from a range of fields (e.g., cognitive, health and organizational psychology, medical decision-making, economics). Guided by detailed descriptions of AF interventions from the health care literature, interviewees described how they would approach the problem of designing improved AF interventions. Specific, theory-informed hypotheses about the conditions for effective design and delivery of AF interventions were elicited from the interviews. The resulting hypotheses were assigned by three coders working independently into themes, and categories of themes, in an iterative process. Results We conducted 28 interviews and identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, which were placed into 30 themes. The 30 themes included hypotheses related to the following five categories: AF recipient (seven themes), content of the AF (ten themes), process of delivery of the AF (six themes), behavior that was the focus of the AF (three themes), and other (four themes). Conclusions We have identified a set of testable, theory-informed hypotheses from a broad range of behavioral and social science that suggest conditions for more effective AF interventions. This work demonstrates the breadth of perspectives about AF from non-healthcare-specific disciplines in a way that yields testable hypotheses for healthcare AF interventions. These results will serve as the foundation for further work seeking to set research priorities among the AF research community. Keywords: Audit and feedback, Implementation science, Knowledge translation, Theory
pubBioMed Central Ltd.
doi10.1186/s13012-017-0646-0
lad01gale_ofa
pages1-10
date2017-09-29