Skip to main content

Table 3 Performance comparators used in the 146 included audit and feedback interventions

From: Clinical performance comparators in audit and feedback: a review of theory and evidence

Performance comparators

n (%)

Benchmarks

88 (60.3)

 Reference group

  Region

39 (24.7)

  State or province

26 (17.8)

  Country

21 (14.4)

  Unit or department, e.g. individual physicians within a hospital

12 (8.2)

  Multistate

5 (3.4)

  Same type units, e.g. teaching hospitals

3 (2.1)

  Other: city or small group

4 (2.7)

 Values

  Mean

37 (25.3)

  Individual peer scores—anonymous or unclear if identifiable

23 (15.8)

  Top 10% mean (or ABC benchmarka)

7 (4.8)

  Median

6 (4.1)

  Other percentiles, e.g. 75th or 80th percentile

6 (4.1)

  Rank or percentile rank

4 (2.7)

  Individual peer scores—identifiable

3 (2.1)

  Other, e.g. min-max or standard deviation

3 (2.1)

  Unclear

22 (15.1)

Trends

17 (9.6)

 Reference period

  Previous 1–6 quarters

7 (4.8)

  Previous 1–12 months

4 (2.7)

  Previous 1–6 half years

2 (1.4)

  Previous 1–15 weeks

2 (1.4)

  Previous 1 year

1 (0.7)

  Unclear

1 (0.7)

Explicit targets

16 (11.0)

 Source

  Investigators

5 (3.4)

  Feedback recipients or local management (i.e. self-set targets)

5 (3.4)

  Expert panel

3 (2.1)

  Other: government or guideline

3 (2.1)

  Unclear

1 (0.7)

 Values

  Absolute targets, e.g. 80% performance level

6 (4.1)

  Relative targets based on benchmarking, e.g. 80th percentile of baseline peer performance

6 (4.1)

  Relative targets based on trends, e.g. 20% improvement from baseline

3 (2.1)

  Unclear

1 (0.7)

No comparators or unclear

48 (32.9)

  1. Items are not mutually exclusive
  2. aABC benchmark achievable benchmark of care, defined as the mean performance level achieved by the top 10% [64]