↓ Skip to main content

How do physicians behave when they participate in audit and feedback activities in a group with their peers?

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
29 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
How do physicians behave when they participate in audit and feedback activities in a group with their peers?
Published in
Implementation Science, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0796-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lara J. Cooke, Diane Duncan, Laura Rivera, Shawn K. Dowling, Christopher Symonds, Heather Armson

Abstract

Audit and feedback interventions may be strengthened using social interaction. With this in mind, the Calgary office of the Alberta Physician Learning Program developed a process for audit and group feedback for physician groups. As a part of a larger project to develop a practical approach to the design and implementation of audit and group feedback projects, we explored patterns of physician behavior during facilitated audit and group feedback sessions. Six audit and group feedback sessions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically to derive a conceptual model of physicians' behaviors during audit and group feedback sessions. A predictable cycle of behaviors emerged from audit and group feedback sessions. This cycle would repeat with discussion of each new data element: reacting to the data, questioning and understanding the data, justifying and contextualizing, sharing and reflecting on the data and relevant guidelines, and planning for change. "Change cues" that emerged within groups reliably pivoted the discussion towards action planning. In audit and group feedback sessions, physicians display a predictable series of behaviors as they move towards commitment to change. Establishing the meaning and credibility of the data is a necessary precursor to reflection. Group reflection leads to "change cues" triggered by group members, which stimulate action planning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Other 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 18 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 23%
Psychology 9 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 26 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 11 December 2019.
All research outputs
#2,032,037
of 25,552,933 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#396
of 1,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,364
of 341,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#10
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,552,933 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 341,147 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.