Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
Research Article

Does feedback improve the quality of cervical smears? A randomized controlled trial.

F Buntinx, J A Knottnerus, H F Crebolder, T Seegers, G G Essed and H Schouten
British Journal of General Practice 1993; 43 (370): 194-198.
F Buntinx
Department of General Practice, State University of Limburg, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J A Knottnerus
Department of General Practice, State University of Limburg, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H F Crebolder
Department of General Practice, State University of Limburg, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T Seegers
Department of General Practice, State University of Limburg, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G G Essed
Department of General Practice, State University of Limburg, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H Schouten
Department of General Practice, State University of Limburg, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

In a randomized controlled trial three methods of feedback of increasing intensity, directed at 183 doctors taking cervical smears, were compared with respect to their effects on the sampling quality of smears. Overall, feedback was found to have no influence on quality criteria in the crude data analysis. However, a significantly larger decrease in the percentage of smears lacking endocervical cells was found in the groups receiving monthly overviews of their results with peer comparison, when compared with the groups not receiving this type of feedback (odds ratio 0.75). Moreover, feedback appeared to have a clear effect on the presence of endocervical cells among doctors submitting a substantial number of smears in the intervention period, as opposed to those who submitted fewer smears. A positive correlation was also observed between the increase in the group mean of the proportions of smears containing pathological cells and the intensity of the feedback. However, this increase did not reach statistical significance. This study suggests that monthly feedback with peer comparison may have a positive relationship with some aspects of quality improvement in cervical screening.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 43 (370)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 43, Issue 370
May 1993
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Does feedback improve the quality of cervical smears? A randomized controlled trial.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
Citation Tools
Does feedback improve the quality of cervical smears? A randomized controlled trial.
F Buntinx, J A Knottnerus, H F Crebolder, T Seegers, G G Essed, H Schouten
British Journal of General Practice 1993; 43 (370): 194-198.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Does feedback improve the quality of cervical smears? A randomized controlled trial.
F Buntinx, J A Knottnerus, H F Crebolder, T Seegers, G G Essed, H Schouten
British Journal of General Practice 1993; 43 (370): 194-198.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of shared care development for long-term mental illness.
  • Integrated primary mental health care: threat or opportunity in the new NHS?
  • "The cawing of the crow...Cassandra-like, prognosticating woe".
Show more Research Article

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

 

Register Now for the BJGP Research Conference, 12 March 2020

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Blog
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2019 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242