From W3C Wiki
It's somewhat traditional to review ActionItems by listing them under a "review of actions" item in the agenda, and calling on the owner of each one in turn, asking whether the owner considers it done or not and whether they owner would like to continue it if not.
This is efficient only when the actions have little to do with the other items on the agenda, which is rarely the case in regular group meetings.
Actions are often in preparation for a group decision that's later in the agenda; for example, Nadia took the action to summarize the options for issue paintColor-23. It's a rare group that has the discipline to note an action done without getting into discussion of paint colors. And if the action is not done, it's often useful to review who's waiting for it, whether someone else is in a better position to act on it, whether it's still worth doing, etc. This sort of negotiation is also important for actions that result from group decisions.
In all these cases, reviewing the action as part of an agendum on issue paintColor-23 is often much more efficient; the MidwestWeeklyAgenda pattern reflects this experience in the case of regular weekly teleconference agendas.