Potential+audit+and+feedback+components+to+test


 * __ PRELIMINARY LIST OF CHARACTERISTICS THAT MAY ALTER EFFECTIVENESS OF FEEDBACK (Ivers et al., 2012) __**


 * ** Elements / characteristics ** || ** Sub-categories / examples ** ||
 * Source || Supervisor, peer, etc. ||
 * Perceived intention of source || Punitive, Formative ||
 * Nature of the “audit” || Quality, trustworthiness of data ||
 * Target || Urgency, relative prioritization ||
 * Complexity of task or behaviour requiring change || Increase or decrease behaviours ||
 * Comparator || Objective, normative, past, etc. ||
 * Channel || Verbal, written, etc. ||
 * Individuality || Group, one-on-one, etc. ||
 * Medium || Computer, paper, etc. ||
 * Presentation || Graphical, text, etc. ||
 * Correct solution information || Goal-setting, action plans, etc. ||
 * Tailoring || Customizability ||
 * Tone, Sign, overall grades || Use of praise or critique ||
 * Focus of attention || Task, Self, etc. ||
 * Length, amount of information provided || High detail, minimal detail, etc. ||
 * Connection between performance and patient-related goals || Aggregate or patient-specific data ||
 * Velocity, Change over time || Number of data points ||
 * Timing || In relation to behaviour and audit ||
 * Frequency || Weekly, monthly, etc. ||
 * Total number of feedback reports ||  ||
 * Context || Setting, resources, etc. ||
 * Characteristics of recipient || Profession/expertise ||
 * || Baseline performance ||
 * || Motivation ||
 * || Participation in audit ||
 * || Participation in goal setting ||
 * || Self efficacy ||
 * || ‘Evidence’ or ‘quality’ orientation ||
 * Characteristics of recipient || Profession/expertise ||
 * || Baseline performance ||
 * || Motivation ||
 * || Participation in audit ||
 * || Participation in goal setting ||
 * || Self efficacy ||
 * || ‘Evidence’ or ‘quality’ orientation ||