Introduction: Redirecting low acuity patients from emergency departments to primary care walk-in clinics has been identified as a priority by many health authorities. Promoting family physicians for the management of ambulatory patients with urgent health concerns reflects the assumption that primary care facilities can offer high-quality and more affordable ambulatory emergency care. However, no performance assessment framework has been developed for ambulatory emergency care and consequently, quality of care provided in these alternate settings has never been formally compared. Primary objective: To identify structure, process and outcome indicators for ambulatory emergency care. Methods: We will identify and develop quality indicators (QIs) for ambulatory emergency care using a RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) composed of three different steps. First, we will perform a scoping literature review to inventory 1) all previously recommended QIs assessing care provided to ambulatory emergency patients in the ED or the primary care settings; 2) all conditions evaluated with the retrieved QIs; and 3) all outcomes measured by the same QIs. Second, a steering committee composed of the research team and of international experts in performance assessment in emergency and primary care will be presented with the lists of QI-related conditions and outcomes. They will be asked to identify potential outcome indicators for ambulatory emergency care by generating any relevant combinations of one condition and one outcome (e.g. acute asthma exacerbation/re-consultation). Committee members will be given the latitude to use and pair any conditions or outcomes not included in the lists as long as they think the resulting indicators are compatible with the study objectives. Using a structured nominal group approach, they will combine their suggestions and refine the list of potential QIs. This list of potential outcome indicators composed of pairs “condition/outcome” will be merged with the list of already published QIs identified during the literature review. Third, as per the RAM standards, we will assemble an international multidisciplinary panel (n=20) of patients, emergency and primary care providers, researchers and decision makers, after recommendations from international emergency and primary care associations, and from the Canadian Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) Support Units. Through iterative rounds of ratings using both web-based survey tools and videoconferencing, panelists will independently assess all candidate QIs. They will be asked to rate on a nine-level scale to what extent each QI is a relevant and useful measure of ambulatory emergency care quality. From one round to the next, QIs with a median panelist rating score of one to three will be excluded. Those with a median score of seven or more will be automatically included in the final list. QIs with median score of four to six will be retained for future deliberations among the panelists. Rounds of ratings will be conducted until all QIs are classified. Impact: The QIs identified will be used to develop a performance assessment framework for ambulatory emergency care. This will represent an essential step toward testing the assumption that EDs and primary care walk-in clinics provide equivalent care quality to low acuity patients.