Letture consigliate

Bibliografia essenziale


    • Grimshaw J, Ivers N, Linklater S on behalf of the Audit and Feedback MetaLab, et al. Reinvigorating stagnant science: implementation laboratories and a meta-laboratory to efficiently advance the science of audit and feedback. BMJ Quality & Safety 2019;28:416-423. [Full text]


    • Gude WT. Understanding and optimizing electronic audit and feedback to improve quality of care. PhD Thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2019 [Full text]


    • Hysong SJ, Kell HJ, Petersen LA, Campbell BA, Trautner BV. Theory-based and evidence-based design of audit and feedback programmes: examples from two clinical interventions studies. BMJ Quality and Safety. 2017;26:323-334. [Abstract]


    • Colquhoun HL, Carroll K, Eva KW, et al. Advancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypothesis. Implementation Science 2017;12:117. [Full text] 


    • Ivers NM, Desveaux L, Presseau J, et al.  Testing feedback message framing and comparators to address prescribing of high-risk medications in nursing homes: protocol for a pragmatic, factorial, cluster-randomized trial. Implementation Science. 2017;12:86. [Full text]


    • Brehaut JC, Colquhoun HL, Eva KW, et al. Practice Feedback Interventions: 15 Suggestions for Optimizing Effectiveness. Ann Intern Med. 2016 Mar 15;164(6):435-41. doi: 10.7326/M15-2248. Epub 2016 Feb 23. [Abstract]


    • McNamara P, Shaller D, De La Mare J, Ivers N. Confidential physician feedback reports: designing for optimal impact on performance. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2016. AHRQ Pub. No. 16-0017-EF. [Full text]


    • Landis-Lewis Z, Brehaut JC, Hochheiser H, Douglas GP, Jacobson RS. Computer-supported feedback message tailoring: theory-informed adaptation of clinical audit and feedback for learning and behavior change. Implementation Science. 2015; 10:12. [Full text]


    • Ivers NM, Grimshaw JM, Jamtvedt G, et al. Growing literature, stagnant science? Systematic review, meta-regression and cumulative analysis of audit and feedback interventions in health care . J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Nov;29(11):1534-41. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2913-y. [Abstract] [Full text]


    • Hurst D. Audit and feedback had small but potentially important improvements in professional practice. Evid Based Dent. 2013 Mar;14(1):8-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6400910. [Abstract] [Full text]


    • Colquhoun HL, Brehaut JC, Sales A, et al. A systematic review of the use of theory in randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback. Implementation Science 2013;8:66.  [Full text]


    • Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (Review). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2012, Issue 6. Art. No.: CD000259. [Full text]


    • Moore JB, Maddock JE, Brownson RC.  The Role of Dissemination in Promotion and Tenure for Public Health. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice 2018; 24 (1): 1–3. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000691 [Full text]


    • Brownson RC, Fielding JE, Green LW. Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Public Health: Reconciling the Pulls of Practice and the Push of Research. Annual Review of Public Health 2018; 39:27-53 [Abstract] [Full paper]


    • Brownson RC, Eyler AA, Harris JK, Moore JB, Tabak RG. Getting the Word Out: New Approaches for Disseminating Public Health Science. J Public Health Manag Pract 2018; 24(2):102-111. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000673. [Abstract] [Full paper]


    • Thoma B, Murray H, Huang SYM, et al. The impact of social media promotion with infographics and podcasts on research dissemination and readership. CJEM 2018;20(2):300-306. doi: 10.1017/cem.2017.394. Epub 2017 Sep 13. [Abstract] [Full paper]


    • Tripathy JP, Bhatnagar A, Shewade HD, Kumar AMV, Zachariah R, Harries AD. Ten tips to improve the visibility and dissemination of research for policy makers and practitioners. Public Health Action 2017; 7(1): 10–14. Published online 2017 Mar 21. doi: 10.5588/pha.16.0090 [Abstract] [Full paper]


    • Tennant JP, Waldner F, Jacques DC, Masuzzo P, Collister LB, Hartgerink CHJ. The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review [version 3; peer review: 4 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. Version 3. F1000Res. 2016 Apr 11 [revised 2016 Sep 21];5:632. eCollection 2016 [Abstract] [Full paper]


    • Neta G, Glasgow RE, Carpenter CR, et al. A Framework for Enhancing the Value of Research for Dissemination and Implementation. Am J Public Health 2015;105(1):49-57. [Abstract] [Full paper]


    • Fox CS, Bonaca MA, Ryan JJ, Massaro JM, Barry K, Loscalzo J. A randomized trial of social media from Circulation. Circulation 2015;131(1):28-33. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.013509. Epub 2014 Nov 18. [Abstract] [Full paper]


    • Rowlands I, Nicholas D, Russell B, Canty N, Watkinson A. Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing 2011; 24 (3):183–195 doi:10.1087/20110306 [Full paper]




    • Costa G, Bassi M, Marra M et al, (a cura di). L’equità nella salute in Italia. Secondo rapporto sulle disuguaglianze sociali in Italia. Milano: Franco Angeli, 2014. [Sintesi del libro bianco]


    • Mirisola C, Ricciardi G, Bevere F, Melazzini M. L’Italia per l’equità nella salute. Roma, novembre 2017. [Documento tecnico]


    • Glover RE, van Schalkwyk MCI, Akl EA et al. A framework for identifying and mitigating the equity harms of COVID-19 policy interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Dec; 128: 35–48. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.004 [Full-text ]
    • Terens N, Vecchi S, Bargagli AM, et al. Quality improvement strategies at primary care level to reduce inequalities in diabetes care: an equity-oriented systematic review. BMC Endocr Disord. 2018;18(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12902-018-0260-4. [Abstract][Full-text]


    • Vecchi S, Agabiti N, Mitrova Z, et al. Audit e feedback e interventi di continuous quality improvement per il miglioramento della qualità delle cure nella gestione del diabete di tipo 2: una revisione sistematica della letteratura scientifica. Epidemiol Prev 2016; 40 (3-4): 215-223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19191/EP16.3-4.AD05.079 [Abstract]


    • Tugwell P, Petkovic J, Welch V, et al. Setting priorities for knowledge translation of Cochrane reviews for health equity: Evidence for Equity. Int J Equity Health 2017;16(1):208. doi: 10.1186/s12939-017-0697-5. [Abstract] [Full-text]


    • Crawford A, Serhal E. Digital Health Equity and COVID-19: The Innovation Curve Cannot Reinforce the Social Gradient of Health. J Med Internet Res 2020;22(6):e19361. doi: 10.2196/19361. [Abstract] [Full-text]


    • Givens ML, Catlin BB, Johnson SP, et al. What Do We Know About the Drivers of Health and Equity? A Narrative Review of Graphic Representations. Health Equity 2020;4(1):446-462. doi: 10.1089/heq.2020.0013. eCollection 2020.[Abstract] [Full-text]

Cochrane Methods Equity

Tassonomia interventi di Quality Improvement

    • Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC)
    • Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). EPOC Taxonomy; 2015.