ArticlePloS one2012
Barriers to partnership working in public health: a qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Mechanisms of Intersectoral Collaboration in the Health System: A Scoping Review.Iranian journal of public health · 2023Article
- Effect of a telecare-based intervention on stress levels in informal caregivers of older adults: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Building engagement to support adoption of community-based substance use prevention initiatives.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Using systems science methods to enhance the work of national and local walking partnerships: practical insights from Ireland.European journal of public health · 2022Article
- Theory-based capacity building intervention for intersectoral action for health at local governments: An exploratory pilot study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2022Article
- Article
- Advancing community-engaged research during the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from a social network analysis of the trans-LINK Network.PloS one · 2022Article
- Improving health through multisectoral collaboration: enablers and barriers.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2021Article
- An evaluation of the Victorian Salt Reduction Partnership's advocacy strategy for policy change.Health research policy and systems · 2021Article
- Exploring the local policy context for reducing health inequalities in children and young people: an in depth qualitative case study of one local authority in the North of England, UK.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Stakeholder perspectives on the effectiveness of the Victorian Salt Reduction Partnership: a qualitative study.BMC nutrition · 2021Article
- Community Action Package in Iran's Comprehensive Mental and Social Health Services (the SERAJ Program).Iranian journal of psychiatry · 2021Article
- Article
- Cross-Sector Collaboration for a Healthy Living Environment-Which Strategies to Implement, Why, and in Which Context?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Stakeholders' experiences of the public health research process: time to change the system?Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Article
- Creating a Collaborative Platform for the Development of Community Interventions to Prevent Non-Communicable Diseases.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Is partnership the answer? Delivering the national immunisation programme in the new English health system: a mixed methods study.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Service Integration Across Sectors in Europe: Literature and Practice.International journal of integrated care · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublic health provision in England is undergoing dramatic changes. Currently established partnerships are thus likely to be significantly disrupted by the radical reforms outlined in the Public Health White Paper. We therefore explored the process of partnership working in public health, in order to better understand the potential opportunities and threats associated with the proposed changes. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findings70 participants took part in an in-depth qualitative study involving 40 semi-structured interviews and three focus group discussions. Participants were senior and middle grade public health decision makers working in Primary Care Trusts, Local Authorities, Department of Health, academia, General Practice and Hospital Trusts and the third sector in England. Despite mature arrangements for partnership working in many areas, and much support for joint working in principle, many important barriers exist. These include cultural issues such as a lack of shared values and language, the inherent complexity of intersectoral collaboration for public health, and macro issues including political and resource constraints. There is particular uncertainty and anxiety about the future of joint working relating to the availability and distribution of scarce and diminishing financial resources. There is also the concern that existing effective collaborative networks may be completely disrupted as the proposed changes unfold. The extent to which the proposed reforms might mitigate or potentiate these issues remains unclear. However the threats currently remain more salient than opportunities.
conclusionsThe current re-organisation of public health offers real opportunity to address some of the barriers to partnership working identified in this study. However, significant threats exist. These include the breakup of established networks, and the risk of cost cutting on effective public health interventions.
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.