Skip to main content
. 2020 Nov 18;4(5):bjgpopen20X101112. doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101112

Table 2. Quality leads' views on cluster meetings and support for cluster activities.

Always, n (%) Nearly always, n (%) Sometimes, n (%) Hardly ever, n (%) Never, n (%)
Extent to which cluster meetings are:
Well organised(n = 593) 174 (29.3) 304 (51.3) 84 (14.2) 24 (4.0) 7 (1.2)
 Friendly (n = 593) 348 (58.7) 218 (36.8) 22 (3.7) 4 (0.7) 1 (0.2)
Well facilitated(n = 591) 175 (29.6) 274 (46.4) 110 (18.6) 25 (4.2) 7 (1.2)
 Productive (n = 593) 88 (14.8) 215 (36.3) 209 (35.2) 65 (11.0) 16 (2.7)
Extent supported in relation to: Fully supported n (%) Almost fully supported n (%) Somewhat supported n (%) Not at all supportedn(%) Not relevantn(%)
 Data (n = 595) 31 (5.2) 92 (15.5) 340 (57.1) 117 (19.7) 15 (2.5)
Health intelligence(n = 593) 19 (3.2) 69 (11.6) 314 (53.0) 159 (26.8) 32 (5.4)
 Analysis (n = 594) 15 (2.5) 73 (12.3) 313 (52.7) 172 (29.0) 21 (3.5)
Quality improvement(n = 593) 18 (3.0) 91 (15.3) 314 (53.0) 154 (26.0) 16 (2.7)
 Advice (n = 593) 20 (3.4) 99 (16.7) 317 (53.5) 141 (23.8) 16 (2.7)
 Leadership (n = 595) 30 (5.0) 99 (16.6) 289 (48.6) 161 (27.1) 16 (2.7)
Evaluation and research(n = 594) 7 (1.2) 52 (8.8) 264 (44.4) 222 (37.4) 49 (8.2)