{
  "abstract": "Audit and feedback (A&F) is a well-studied implementation strategy and widely regarded as a practical engine for quality improvement in healthcare.1 2 By transforming clinical data into reports to provide insights into clinical performance and care processes, A&F can identify where practice deviates from evidence-based standards and provides clinicians with relevant, credible and actionable feedback.3 4 Over time, A&F has evolved from static reports to more interactive and user-friendly approaches that include realistic comparators and embedded action plans.3 5 Its effectiveness depends not only on technical design but also on psychological and organisational factors such as credibility of the feedback, leadership support and a culture of learning and improvement. 4 6However, the optimal design of an A&F intervention and the extent to which these factors influence its effectiveness are still unknown. Moreover, it remains unclear which clinicians will voluntarily engage with A&F and which practice characteristics influence this. In primary care, where workloads are heavy and variation is driven by both clinical complexity and social context, understanding the factors and design choices that influence engagement with A&F may determine whether A&F fits the realities of practice.",
  "authors": [
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Academic Center for General Practice, KU Leuven Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leuven, Flanders, Belgium",
        "Research Group Healthcare and Ethics, UHasselt, Hasselt, Flanders, Belgium"
      ],
      "name": "Steve Van den Bulck"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Academic Center for General Practice, KU Leuven Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leuven, Flanders, Belgium"
      ],
      "name": "Bert Vaes"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Audit and feedback in primary care: if you build it, will they come? Understanding which clinicians engage with an audit and feedback intervention",
  "uid": "9eb7a7a6-19a5-5e5f-8cb7-6ad905cb5167"
}