ArticleCritical care (London, England)2004
The rules of the game: interprofessional collaboration on the intensive care unit team.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 201 citations in OpenAlex.
- Content overlap in nurse and physician handoff artifacts and the potential role of electronic health records: a systematic review.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2011Pooled it
- Article
- Learning to reflect together: a video-facilitated reflective inquiry and linguistic analysis of collaborative clinical reasoning in intensive care.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Role Performance Scale for Patient Safety Coordinators: Secondary Data Analysis.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Hidden beneath the surface: what are the knowledge and skills for successful transition to practice.CJEM · 2025Article
- Article
- Impact of temporary nursing staff on communication patterns: an observation study during daily nurse huddles.BMJ open quality · 2025Observational
- Intensive care nurses' experiences of teamwork during the covid-19 pandemic. a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Development of an Integrative Medicine Rotation for Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine Residency.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2025Article
- "Ego massaging that helps": a framework analysis study of internal medicine trainees' interprofessional collaboration approaches.Medical education online · 2023Article
- Identifying the unique behaviors embedded in the process of interprofessional collaboration in the ICU.Journal of interprofessional care · 2023Article
- Who Is Teaching Residents in the Intensive Care Unit? Perceptions of Interprofessional Teaching at an Academic Medical Center.ATS scholar · 2023Article
- How doctors build community and socialize into a clinical department through morning reports. A positioning theory study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Challenges and opportunities in interprofessional education and practice.Lancet (London, England) · 2022Article
- Nurses' Contributions in Rural Family Medicine Education: A Mixed-Method Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The Case for Interprofessional Teaching in Graduate Medical Education.ATS scholar · 2022Article
- Designing a critical care solution using in-person and telemedicine approaches in the US-Mexico border area during COVID-19.Health policy OPEN · 2021Article
- Identifying competencies for integrated knowledge translation: a Delphi study.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Supervision, Interprofessional Collaboration, and Patient Safety in Intensive Care Units during the COVID-19 Pandemic.ATS scholar · 2021Article
- An In-Person and Telemedicine "Hybrid" System to Improve Cross-Border Critical Care in COVID-19.Annals of global health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe intensive care unit (ICU) is a nexus for interspecialty and interdisciplinary tensions because of its pivotal role in the care of the hospital's most critically ill patients and in the management of critical care resources. In an environment charged with temporal, financial and professional tensions, learning how to get results collaboratively is a critical aspect of professional competence. This study explored how team members in the ICU interact to achieve daily clinical goals, delineate professional boundaries and negotiate complex systems issues.
methodsSeven 1-hour focus groups were conducted with ICU team members in two hospitals. Participants consisted of four nursing groups (n = 27), two resident groups (n = 6) and one intensivist group (n = 4). Interviews were audio-recorded, anonymized and transcribed. With the use of a standard qualitative approach, transcripts were analyzed iteratively for recurrent themes by four researchers.
resultsTeam members articulated their perceptions of the mechanisms by which team collaboration was achieved or undermined in a complex and high-pressure context. Two mechanisms were recurrently described: the perception of 'ownership' and the process of 'trade'. Analysis of these mechanisms reveals how power is commodified, possessed and exchanged as team members negotiate their daily needs and goals with one another.
conclusionOur data provide a non-idealized depiction of how health care professionals function on a team so as to meet both individual and collective goals. We contend that the concept of 'team' must move beyond the rhetoric of 'cooperation' and towards a more authentic depiction of the skills and strategies required to function in the competitive setting of the interprofessional health care team.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.