Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Evaluation in clinical practice: problems, precedents and principles

N McIntyre1

  • 1University Department of Medicine, Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine, London, UK.

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
|September 1, 1995
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Varlitinib plus capecitabine in second-line advanced biliary tract cancer: a randomized, phase II study (TreeTopp).

ESMO open·2021
Same author

The new clinical curriculum at the royal free hospital school of medicine.

Medical teacher·2014
Same author

Two Cases of Thromboembolic Disease Associated with Oral Contraceptives.

British medical journal·2010
Same author

Sediment and pollutant load modelling using an integrated urban drainage modelling toolbox: an application of City Drain.

Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research·2010
Same author

Medical statues--Irish and others.

Irish journal of medical science·2003
Same author

Sir Hans Sloane (1660-1753).

Journal of medical biography·2001
Same journal

Evaluating Restraint and Seclusion as Care Processes Rather Than Compliance Metrics.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Burden in Informal Caregivers of Palliative Care Patients With Pressure Injuries: Perceived Social Support and Influencing Factors Care Burden in Palliative Caregivers.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Organisational Problems, Role Stress, and Job Satisfaction Among Emergency Department Workers: A Multicenter Mixed-Effects Study.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Highlighting a Systemic Bias in the Responder Odds Ratio.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Epistemological Issues in Clinical Reasoning: A Scoping Review.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

An Evaluation of AI-Generated Clinical Notes in the OpenNotes Era: A Thematic Analysis of Clinician Discourse.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
See all related articles

Clinical audit is widely used but lacks documented improvement. Process audit, focusing on clinical actions and individual performance, offers greater educational value and immediate patient benefit than outcome audit.

Area of Science:

  • Healthcare Management
  • Clinical Practice Improvement
  • Medical Education

Background:

  • Clinical audit is prevalent in the National Health Service, yet evidence of its effectiveness in improving care is limited.
  • Physicians express concerns regarding litigation, professional authority, and practice interference, hindering open evaluation.
  • There is a lack of clarity regarding the optimal methodologies for conducting clinical audits.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To differentiate the purposes and applications of outcome audit versus process audit.
  • To highlight the potential of process audit for identifying deficiencies in clinical practice and enhancing medical education.
  • To emphasize the need for improved clinical record-keeping to support effective audit processes.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Distinguishing between outcome audit (measuring care's effect on patient health) and process audit (evaluating the appropriateness of clinical actions).
  • Analyzing the limitations of outcome audit, including its requirement for large patient groups, high costs, and limited applicability to individual practitioners.
  • Examining the strengths of process audit in assessing individual performance using clear criteria, protocols, or agreed principles of clinical practice.

    • Main Results:

    • Outcome audit is costly, requires large patient cohorts, and is less effective for evaluating individual doctor performance.
    • Process audit can identify poor performance even when outcomes are not clearly poor and is applicable to all clinical problems.
    • Process audit offers direct patient benefits through immediate feedback and has significant educational value for continuous professional development.

    Conclusions:

    • Process audit is the preferred method for assessing individual clinical actions and provides a continuum for medical training.
    • Effective clinical audit, particularly process audit, necessitates adequate documentation and analysis of patient data.
    • Further development and implementation of process audit are crucial for driving tangible improvements in healthcare quality and medical education.