↓ Skip to main content

Benchmarked performance charts using principal components analysis to improve the effectiveness of feedback for audit data in HIV care

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Benchmarked performance charts using principal components analysis to improve the effectiveness of feedback for audit data in HIV care
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2426-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Skevi Michael, Mark Gompels, Caroline Sabin, Hilary Curtis, Margaret T. May

Abstract

Feedback tools for clinical audit data that compare site-specific results to average performance over all sites can be useful for quality improvement. Proposed tools should be simple and clearly benchmark the site's performance, so that a relevant action plan can be directly implemented to improve patient care services. We aimed to develop such a tool in order to feedback data to UK HIV clinics participating in the 2015 British HIV Association (BHIVA) audit assessing compliance with the 2011 guidelines for routine investigation and monitoring of adult HIV-1- infected individuals. HIV clinic sites were asked to provide data on a random sample of 50-100 adult patients attending for HIV care during 2014 and/or 2015 by completing a self-audit spreadsheet. Outcomes audited included the proportion of patients with recorded resistance testing, viral load monitoring, adherence assessment, medications, hepatitis testing, vaccination management, risk assessments, and sexual health screening. For each outcome we benchmarked the proportion for a specific site against the average performance. We produced performance charts for each site using boxplots for the outcomes. We also used the mean and differences from the mean performance to produce a dashboard for each site. We used principal components analysis to group correlated outcomes and simplify the dashboard. The 106 sites included in the study provided information on a total of 7768 patients. Outcomes capturing monitoring of treatment of HIV-infection showed high performance across the sites, whereas testing for hepatitis, and risk assessment for cardiovascular disease and smoking, management of flu vaccination, sexual health screening, and cervical cytology for women were very variable across sites. The principal components analysis reduced the original 12 outcomes to four factors that represented HIV care, hepatitis testing, other screening tests, and resistance testing. These provided simplified measures of adherence to guidelines which were presented as a 4 bar dashboard of performance. Our dashboard performance charts provide easily digestible visual summaries of locally relevant audit data that are benchmarked against the overall mean and can be used to improve feedback to HIV services. Feedback from clinicians indicated that they found these charts acceptable and useful.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Researcher 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 33 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Psychology 4 6%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 35 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 August 2017.
All research outputs
#6,341,670
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,007
of 7,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,152
of 316,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#82
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,701 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,512 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.