Research, audit and quality improvement

International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 105-111

  Paxton, Roger ^a,d   Whitty, Paula ^b   Zaatar, Ali ^a,d   Fairbairn, Andrew ^a,d   Lothian, Jane ^c  

^a TYNE AND WEAR NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d ST NICHOLAS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Auditing; Quality improvement; Research; Specifications

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; MANAGEMENT; MEDICAL AUDIT; ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; REVIEW; STANDARD; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MANAGEMENT AUDIT; MEDICAL AUDIT; ORGANIZATIONAL OBJECTIVES; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

EID: 33644582755     PISSN: 09526862     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/09526860610642627     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Casarett, D., Karlawish, J. and Sugarman, J. (2000), "Determining when quality improvement initiatives should be considered research", Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 283 No. 17, pp. 2275-80.
2. Choo, V. (1998), "Thin line between research and audit", Lancet, Vol. 352 No. 9135, pp. 337-8.
3. Jamrozik, K. (2004), "Research ethics paperwork: what is the plot we seem to have lost?", British Medical Journal, Vol. 329 No. 7460, pp. 286-7.
4. Jones, A.M. and Bamford, B. (2004), "The other face of research governance", British Medical Journal, Vol. 329 No. 7460, pp. 280-1.
5. Lo, B. and Groman, M. (2003), "Oversight of quality improvement; focusing on benefits and risks", Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 163 No. 12, pp. 1481-6.
6. Madden, A. (1997), King's Manual for Research Ethics Committees, King's College, London.
7. Medical Research Council (2000), A Framework for Development and Evaluation of RCTs for Complex Interventions to Improve Health, Medical Research Council, London.
8. Parker, M., Ashcroft, R., Wilkie, A.O.M. and Kent, A. (2004), "Ethical review of research into rare genetic disorders", British Medical Journal, Vol. 329 No. 7460, pp. 288-9.
9. Perneger, T. (2004), "Why we need ethical oversight of quality improvement projects", International Journal for Quality in Health Care, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 343-4.
10. Royal Australian College of Surgeons (2002), A Guide by the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons: Surgical Audit and Peer Review, 1st ed., Royal College of Surgeons, Melbourne.
11. Royal College of Physicians of London (1996), Guidelines on the Practice of Ethics Committees in Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, 3rd ed., RCP, London.
12. Russell, I. (1996), "What is research and development?", Refocus, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 4-5.
13. Smith, R. (1992), "Audit and research", British Medical Journal, Vol. 305 No. 6859, pp. 905-6.
14. Thomson O'Brien, M.A., Oxman, A.D., Davis, D.A., Haynes, R.B., Freemantle, N. and Harvey, E.L. (2000), Audit and Feedback: Effects on Professional Practice and Healthcare Outcomes (Cochrane Review, The Cochrane Library), No. 3, Update Software, Oxford.
15. Warlow, C. (2004), "Clinical research under the cosh again", British Medical Journal, Vol. 329 No. 7460, pp. 241-2.
16. Wilson, A., Grimshaw, G. and Baker, R. (1999), "Differentiating between audit and research: postal survey of health authorities' views", British Medical Journal, Vol. 319 No. 7219, p. 1235.