Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25943372›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2015

Who is in control? Clinicians' view on their role in self-management approaches: a qualitative metasynthesis.

Suzie Mudge, Nicola Kayes, Kathryn McPherson

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

3 authors.

Suzie MudgeCentre for Person Centred Research, Faculty of Health and Environmental Science, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Nicola KayesCentre for Person Centred Research, Faculty of Health and Environmental Science, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Kathryn McPhersonCentre for Person Centred Research, Faculty of Health and Environmental Science, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand Health Research Council of New Zealand, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore clinician perceptions of involvement in delivery of self-management approaches.

settingAll healthcare settings.

designEBSCO, Scopus and AMED databases were searched, in July 2013, for peer-reviewed studies in English reporting original qualitative data concerning perceptions of clinicians regarding their involvement in or integration of a self-management approach. Of 1930 studies identified, 1889 did not meet the inclusion criteria. Full text of 41 studies were reviewed by two independent reviewers; 14 papers were included for metasynthesis. Findings and discussion sections were imported into Nvivo-10 and coded line-by-line. Codes were organised into descriptive themes and cross-checked against original sources to check interpretation, and refined iteratively until findings represented an agreed understanding. Studies were appraised for quality.

resultsDelivering self-management in practice appeared to be a complex process for many clinicians. The issue of 'control' arose in all studies, both in the qualitative data and authors' interpretations. The first theme: Who is in control?--represented ways clinicians talked of exercising control over patients and the control they expected patients to have over their condition. The second theme: Changing clinician views--reflected what appeared to be an essential transformation of practice experienced by some clinicians in the process of integrating self-management approaches into the practice. A range of challenges associated with shifting towards a self-management approach were reflected in the third theme, Overcoming challenges to change. Tensions appeared to exist around forming partnerships with patients. Strategies found helpful in the process of change included: dedicating time to practice reciprocity in communication style, peer support and self-reflection.

conclusionsA consistent finding across studies is that 'control' is a key feature of how self-management is viewed by clinicians. They described challenges associated with the paradigm shift required to share or let go of control. Future research should identify whether strategies described by clinicians are key to successful self-management.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth PersonnelPersonal AutonomyProfessional RoleSelf CareDelivery of Health CareHumanshealth occupationsprofessional practiceself-management

Identifiers

PMID25943372
PMCPMC4431068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.