***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: We included and analysed 140 studies for this review. In the main analyses, a total of 108 comparisons from 70 studies compared any intervention in which audit and feedback was a core, essential component to usual care and evaluated effects on professional practice. After excluding studies at high risk of bias, there were 82 comparisons from 49 studies featuring dichotomous outcomes, and the weighted median adjusted RD was a 4.3% (interquartile range (IQR) 0.5% to 16%) absolute increase in healthcare professionals' compliance with desired practice. Across 26 comparisons from 21 studies with continuous outcomes, the weighted median adjusted percent change relative to control was 1.3% (IQR = 1.3% to 28.9%). For patient outcomes, the weighted median RD was -0.4% (IQR -1.3% to 1.6%) for 12 comparisons from six studies reporting dichotomous outcomes and the weighted median percentage change was 17% (IQR 1.5% to 17%) for eight comparisons from five studies reporting continuous outcomes. Multivariable meta-regression indicated that feedback may be more effective when baseline performance is low, the source is a supervisor or colleague, it is provided more than once, it is delivered in both verbal and written formats, and when it includes both explicit targets and an action plan. In addition, the effect size varied based on the clinical behaviour targeted by the intervention. Audit and feedback generally leads to small but potentially important improvements in professional practice. The effectiveness of audit and feedback seems to depend on baseline performance and how the feedback is provided. Future studies of audit and feedback should directly compare different ways of providing feedback.
Output:

In some studies, health professionals were simply given information about their performance and how this compared to professional standards or targets. In other studies, health professionals were also given a specific target that they personally were expected to reach, or were given an action plan with suggestions or advice about how to improve their performance. What happens when health professionals are given audit and feedback? The effect of using audit and feedback varied widely across the included studies. Overall, the review shows that: The effect of audit and feedback on professional behaviour and on patient outcomes ranges from little or no effect to a substantial effect. The quality of the evidence is moderate. Audit and feedback may be most effective when: 1. the health professionals are not performing well to start out with; 2. the person responsible for the audit and feedback is a supervisor or colleague; 3. it is provided more than once; 4. it is given both verbally and in writing; 5. it includes clear targets and an action plan. In addition, the effect of audit and feedback may be influenced by the type of behaviour it is targeting. It is uncertain whether audit and feedback is more effective when combined with other interventions.