Audit and Feedback Study, 4 Nations, Primary Care
ClinicalTrials.gov Studies
Summary
NIH ClinicalTrials.gov registered a multi-phase research study (NCT07542587) evaluating an optimized audit and feedback (AnF) strategy to improve primary healthcare provider clinical practice. The study will conduct a two-arm, multicentre RCT across Nepal, Mozambique, Tanzania, and China, focusing on hypertension and diabetes care quality.
“Implementation science seeks to promote the routine use of evidence-based practices by identifying barriers to their implementation and developing strategies, such as audit and feedback (AnF), to overcome them.”
What changed
NIH ClinicalTrials.gov added registration NCT07542587 for a clinical research study evaluating audit and feedback (AnF) interventions to improve primary healthcare provider adherence to evidence-based guidelines for hypertension and diabetes. The study uses a 2×2×2×2 factorial design RCT during an optimization phase, followed by a two-arm multicentre RCT across four nations.
Affected parties include primary healthcare researchers, implementation science investigators, and healthcare quality improvement programs. The trial registration provides protocol transparency for stakeholders conducting or reviewing comparative effectiveness research on clinical audit interventions in resource-limited settings.
Archived snapshot
Apr 21, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
Evaluating the Implementation Via Audit and Feedback
N/A NCT07542587 Kind: NA Apr 21, 2026
Abstract
The ability of primary healthcare (PHC) providers to practice in accordance with evidence-based guidelines and norms is a critical component of improving the quality of primary healthcare. Implementation science seeks to promote the routine use of evidence-based practices by identifying barriers to their implementation and developing strategies, such as audit and feedback (AnF), to overcome them. However, because the effects of AnF show significant heterogeneity across studies, this research focuses on systematically developing an optimized AnF strategy and rigorously evaluating its effectiveness in improving clinical practice compared to no intervention. The development of an optimized AnF strategy involves a preparation phase, which utilizes expert consultation and a Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) survey to identify key candidate components and assess resource constraints, followed by an optimization phase utilizing a 2×2×2×2 factorial design randomized controlled trial (RCT) to determine the most effective combination of AnF components. Subsequently, in the evaluation phase, a two-arm, multicentre RCT will be conducted across four nations (Nepal, Mozambique, Tanzania, and China). Primary healthcare providers (PHPs) will be 1:1 randomly assigned to either the optimized AnF intervention group or a no intervention control group based on randomly permuted blocks (sizes 2, 4, and 6), stratified by country. Care quality will be assessed using the gold standard method of Unannounced...
Conditions: Hypertension, Diabetes
Interventions: Optimised AnF intervention package
Mentioned entities
Related changes
Get daily alerts for ClinicalTrials.gov Studies
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Source
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from NIH.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when ClinicalTrials.gov Studies publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.