Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27230750›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Making doctors manage… but how? Recent developments in the Italian NHS.

Federico Lega, Marco Sartirana

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Federico LegaCERGAS - Centre for Research on Healthcare Management and SDA Department of Public Management and Policy, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy. federico.lega@unibocconi.it.
Marco SartiranaCERGAS - Centre for Research on Healthcare Management and SDA Department of Public Management and Policy, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.
Bocconi University · ITUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvolving doctors in management has been intended as one of the strategies to spread organizational principles in healthcare settings. However, professionals often resist taking on relevant managerial responsibility, and the question concerning by which means to engage doctors in management in a manner that best fit the challenges encountered by different health systems remains open to debate.

methodsThis paper analyzes the different forms of medical management experienced over time in the Italian NHS, a relevant "lab" to study the evolution of the involvement of doctors in management, and provides a framework for disentangling different dimensions of medical management.

resultsWe show how new means to engage frontline professionals in management spread, without deliberate planning, as a consequence of the innovations in service provision that are introduced to respond to the changes in the healthcare sector.

conclusionsThis trend is promising because such means of performing medical management appear to be more easily compatible with professional logics; therefore, this could facilitate the engagement of a large proportion of professionals rather than the currently limited number of doctors who are "forced" or willing to take formal management roles.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHumansItalyMedical Staff, HospitalPhysiciansPractice Management, MedicalPractice Patterns, Physicians'ProfessionalismState MedicineClinical directorsHospitalsHybridsItalyMedical managementProfessionalism

Identifiers

PMID27230750
PMCPMC4896254
OpenAlexW2399850385

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.