{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01928374655647383, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013085399449035813, 'mean_word_length': 5.400881057268722, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The impact of different data feedback methods on provider response to the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

OBJECTIVE
To compare the effects of feedback methods on the type and frequency of responses received after dissemination of Cooperative Cardiovascular Project data.


METHODS
Feedback visits were conducted throughout Iowa by means of two approaches; in-person (on-site) visits and telephone conference calls. The content of the presentations was the same for both approaches. This study examined the efficacy of the feedback methods used as determined by the response rates of facilities. A standardized questionnaire was requested from each facility to document the types of action taken by the facilities as a result of the presentations. The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project data were presented to 106 Iowa facilities. On-site presentations were held at 56 facilities; telephone conferences were held with 50 facilities.


RESULTS
Facilities that were visited on-site responded with definite quality improvement plans more frequently than did facilities that participated in telephone conferences. Improvement plans were received from 36 of the 56 facilities (64%) visited on-site and from 20 of the 50 facilities (40%) participating in telephone conferences.


CONCLUSIONS
On-site visits appeared to be more effective than telephone conferences in promoting quality improvement efforts through facility-specific feedback presentations.