Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25887910›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2015

The challenges of boundary spanners in supporting inter-organizational collaboration in primary care--a qualitative study of general practitioners in a new role.

Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard, Anne Sofie Kjær Joensen, Thorkil Thorsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 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
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

3 authors.

Marius Brostrøm KousgaardThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, PO Box 2099, Copenhagen, DK-1014, Denmark. marbro@sund.ku.dk.
Anne Sofie Kjær JoensenThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, PO Box 2099, Copenhagen, DK-1014, Denmark. asjacobsen_2000@yahoo.com.
Thorkil ThorsenThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, PO Box 2099, Copenhagen, DK-1014, Denmark. snm985@sund.ku.dk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe visions of more integrated care have created new roles and accountabilities for organizations and professionals. Thus, professionals are increasingly expected to engage in boundary spanning activities in order to facilitate inter-organizational and inter-sectoral collaboration. However, this task can be difficult for individual actors and it is important to investigate the work and challenges of boundary spanners in various settings. This study explores the challenges related to a new boundary spanning role for general practitioners employed to facilitate collaboration between the municipalities and general practice.

methodsThe study is based on semi-structured interviews with ten general practitioners acting as municipal practice consultants in the Capital Region of Denmark. The transcribed interviews were analyzed in several steps organizing the material into a set of coherent and distinct categories covering the different types of challenges experienced by the informants.

resultsThe main challenges of the general practitioners acting as boundary spanners were: 1) defining and negotiating the role in terms of tasks and competencies; 2) representing and mobilizing colleagues in general practice; 3) navigating in an unfamiliar organizational context.

conclusionsThe results support previous studies in emphasizing the difficult and multifaceted character of the boundary spanning role. While some of these challenges are not easily dealt with due to their structural causes, organizations employing boundary spanners should take note of these challenges and support their boundary spanners with matching resources and competencies.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorLocal GovernmentProfessional RoleCanadaDenmarkEfficiency, OrganizationalGeneral PractitionersHumansModels, OrganizationalOrganizational ObjectivesPrimary Health CareReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

PMID25887910
PMCPMC4355472

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.