ArticleBMJ open2015
Testing a model of facilitated reflection on network feedback: a mixed method study on integration of rural mental healthcare services for older people.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Older Adults in Administrative Quagmire: A Scoping Review of Policy and Program Coordination Across Six Marginalized Older Adult Populations.The Gerontologist · 2024Article
- Aligning healthcare, public health and social services: A scoping review of the role of purpose, governance, finance and data.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Applying network analysis to assess the development and sustainability of multi-sector coalitions.PloS one · 2022Article
- Leadership in Integrated Care Networks: A Literature Review and Opportunities for Future Research.International journal of integrated care · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo test a management model of facilitated reflection on network feedback as a means to engage services in problem solving the delivery of integrated primary mental healthcare to older people.
designParticipatory mixed methods case study evaluating the impact of a network management model using organisational network feedback (through social network analysis, key informant interviews and policy review).
interventionA model of facilitated network reflection using network theory and methods.
settingA rural community in South Australia.
participants32 staff from 24 services and 12 senior service managers from mental health, primary care and social care services.
resultsHealth and social care organisations identified that they operated in clustered self-managed networks within sectors, with no overarching purposive older people's mental healthcare network. The model of facilitated reflection revealed service goal and role conflicts. These discussions helped local services to identify as a network, and begin the problem-solving communication and referral links. A Governance Group assisted this process. Barriers to integrated servicing through a network included service funding tied to performance of direct care tasks and the lack of a clear lead network administration organisation.
conclusionsA model of facilitated reflection helped organisations to identify as a network, but revealed sensitivity about organisational roles and goals, which demonstrated that conflict should be expected. Networked servicing needed a neutral network administration organisation with cross-sectoral credibility, a mandate and the resources to monitor the network, to deal with conflict, negotiate commitment among the service managers, and provide opportunities for different sectors to meet and problem solve. This requires consistency and sustained intersectoral policies that include strategies and funding to facilitate and maintain health and social care networks in rural communities.
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.