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]