Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22373078›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2012

A qualitative study of stakeholder views of the conditions for and outcomes of successful clinical networks.

Elizabeth McInnes, Sandy Middleton, Glenn Gardner, Mary Haines, Maggie Haertsch, Christine L Paul, Peter Castaldi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A structuration framework for bridging the macro-micro divide in health-care governance.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Elizabeth McInnesNursing Research Institute, St Vincents and Mater Health Sydney and Australian Catholic University, National Centre for Clinical Outcomes Research, St Vincent's Public Hospital Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia. liz.mcinnes@acu.edu.au
Sandy Middleton
Glenn Gardner
Mary Haines
Maggie Haertsch
Christine L Paul
Peter Castaldi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical networks have been established to improve health outcomes and processes of care by implementing a range of innovations and undertaking projects based on perceived local need. Limited research exists on the necessary conditions required to bring about successful network outcomes and what characterises network success from the perspective of those involved in network initiatives. This qualitative study identified stakeholder views on i) the conditions for effective clinical networks; and ii) desirable outcomes of successful clinical networks.

methodsTwenty-seven participants were interviewed using face-to-face audio-recorded semi-structured interviews. Transcribed data were coded and analysed to generate themes relating to the study aims.

resultsFive key factors represented as sub-themes were identified as important conditions for the establishment of successful clinical networks under the main theme of effective network structure, organisation and governance. These were: building relationships; effective leadership; strategic evidence-based workplans; adequate resources; and ability to implement and evaluate network initiatives. Two major themes encapsulated views on desirable outcomes of successful clinical networks: connecting and engaging which represented the outcomes of interdisciplinary and consumer collaboration and, partnerships with state health and local health services, and changing the landscape of care, which represented the importance of outcomes associated with improving services, care and patient health outcomes and implementing evidence-based practice.

conclusionsThis study provides new knowledge on the conditions needed to establish successful clinical networks and on desirable outcomes arising from network projects and initiatives that are considered to be valuable by those working in or associated with clinical networks. This provides health services with information on what needs to be in place for successful networks and on the types of outcomes that can be considered for assessing network effectiveness.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthCommunity NetworksCommunity ParticipationHealth Care CoalitionsHealth Services for the AgedHumansInterviews as TopicNew South WalesOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID22373078
PMCPMC3325167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.