Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/42920
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorvan den Wyngaert, Ine-
dc.contributor.authorVan Pottelbergh, Gijs-
dc.contributor.authorCoteur, Kristien-
dc.contributor.authorVaes, Bert-
dc.contributor.authorVAN DEN BULCK, Steve-
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-14T07:46:28Z-
dc.date.available2024-05-14T07:46:28Z-
dc.date.issued2024-
dc.date.submitted2024-05-13T13:09:28Z-
dc.identifier.citationBMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 24 (1) (Art N° 433)-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1942/42920-
dc.description.abstractBackground Audit and feedback (A&F) is a widely used implementation strategy to evaluate and improve medical practice. The optimal design of an A&F system is uncertain and structured process evaluations are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop and validate a questionnaire to evaluate the use of automated A&F systems.Methods Based on the Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT) and the REFLECT-52 (REassessing audit & Feedback interventions: a tooL for Evaluating Compliance with suggested besT practices) evaluation tool a questionnaire was designed for the purpose of evaluating automated A&F systems. A Rand-modified Delphi method was used to develop the process evaluation and obtain validation. Fourteen experts from different domains in primary care consented to participate and individually scored the questions on a 9-point Likert scale. Afterwards, the questions were discussed in a consensus meeting. After approval, the final questionnaire was compiled.Results A 34-question questionnaire composed of 57 items was developed and presented to the expert panel. The consensus meeting resulted in a selection of 31 questions, subdivided into 43 items. A final list of 30 questions consisting of 42 items was obtained.Conclusion A questionnaire consisting of 30 questions was drawn up for the assessment and improvement of automated A&F systems, based on CP-FIT and REFLECT-52 theory and approved by experts. Next steps will be piloting and implementation of the questionnaire.-
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors would like to thank and acknowledge the expert panel for their collaboration in the validation of the questionnaire: Ms. Capiau, Dr. Coursier, Prof. dr. Delvaux, Mr. Haras, Ms. Liekens, Ms. Seys, Mr. Saevels, Mr. Schoonvaere, Dr. Teughels, Ms. Van de Putte, Dr. Van den Bulck, Prof. Dr. Vankrunkelsven, Prof. Dr. Van Pottelbergh, Dr. Zeevaert.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherBMC-
dc.rightsThe Author(s) 2024. Open Access This 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.-
dc.subject.otherMedical audit-
dc.subject.otherQuality of health care-
dc.subject.otherAudit and feedback-
dc.subject.otherProcess evaluation-
dc.subject.otherDelphi method-
dc.subject.otherQuestionnaire-
dc.titleDeveloping a questionnaire to evaluate an automated audit & feedback intervention: a Rand-modified Delphi method-
dc.typeJournal Contribution-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.volume24-
local.format.pages11-
local.bibliographicCitation.jcatA1-
dc.description.notesvan den Wyngaert, I (corresponding author), Univ Leuven, Acad Ctr Gen Practice, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Leuven, Belgium.-
dc.description.notesine.vandenwyngaert@kuleuven.be-
local.publisher.placeCAMPUS, 4 CRINAN ST, LONDON N1 9XW, ENGLAND-
local.type.refereedRefereed-
local.type.specifiedArticle-
local.bibliographicCitation.artnr433-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12913-024-10915-2-
dc.identifier.pmid38581009-
dc.identifier.isi001197811400004-
dc.contributor.orcidVan den Wyngaert, Ine/0000-0001-5515-4750; Van den Bulck,-
dc.contributor.orcidSteve/0000-0003-0744-3923; Van Pottelbergh, gijs/0000-0002-4189-3517-
local.provider.typewosris-
local.description.affiliation[van den Wyngaert, Ine; Van Pottelbergh, Gijs; Coteur, Kristien; Vaes, Bert; van den Bulck, Steve] Univ Leuven, Acad Ctr Gen Practice, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Leuven, Belgium.-
local.description.affiliation[van den Bulck, Steve] UHasselt, Fac Med & Life Sci, Res Grp Healthcare & Eth, Diepenbeek, Belgium.-
local.uhasselt.internationalno-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.accessRightsOpen Access-
item.fullcitationvan den Wyngaert, Ine; Van Pottelbergh, Gijs; Coteur, Kristien; Vaes, Bert & VAN DEN BULCK, Steve (2024) Developing a questionnaire to evaluate an automated audit & feedback intervention: a Rand-modified Delphi method. In: BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 24 (1) (Art N° 433).-
item.contributorvan den Wyngaert, Ine-
item.contributorVan Pottelbergh, Gijs-
item.contributorCoteur, Kristien-
item.contributorVaes, Bert-
item.contributorVAN DEN BULCK, Steve-
crisitem.journal.eissn1472-6963-
Appears in Collections:Research publications
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
s12913-024-10915-2.pdfPublished version1.25 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.