SynthesisBMC family practice2016
'Gearing Up' to improve interprofessional collaboration in primary care: a systematic review and conceptual framework.
Synthesis in BMC family practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 106 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
106 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Pharmacist involvement in overweight and obesity care: An equity-focused systematic review.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Assessment of European health professionals' educational needs in basic principles of geriatric medicine: a focus group qualitative analysis from the PROGRAMMING COST Action 21122.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Optimizing Resident Experience in Continuity Clinic: Recommendations for Internal Medicine Residency Training-A Report from the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) and Association of Chiefs and Leaders of General Internal Medicine (ACLGIM) Hess Initiative Work Group on Learner Experience in Primary Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Interdisciplinary collaborative skill development in a health research training program in Zambia.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Feasibility and effectiveness of an interprofessional educational program on perinatal mental health: perspectives of health students in two African countries.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Exploring prehospital perceptions of interprofessional knowledge as a factor in emergency centre handover: a qualitative study of prehospital emergency care personnel.The Pan African medical journal · 2026Article
- Seeds of change: First assessment of an interprofessional training for medical and nursing students through INITIAL ("INnovative InTerprofessIonAl Learning in primary care"): A mixed-method evaluation.GMS journal for medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- Practices and outcomes of multidisciplinary collaboration to support the integration of healthcare into the daily lives of technology-dependent children.Japan journal of nursing science : JJNS · 2026Article
- Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Concept Analysis.Journal of caring sciences · 2025Review
- Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Healthcare: A Qualitative Study of General Practitioners' and Family and Community Nurses' Perspectives in Italy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Collaboration in nursing-home care: perspectives of care professionals - a qualitative study.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Unpacking the black box of interprofessional collaboration within healthcare networks: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Challenges and solutions to nurse-delivered integrated primary health care in Nelson Mandela Bay.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Pharmaceutical Public Health: A Mixed-Methods Study Exploring Pharmacy Professionals' Advanced Roles in Public Health, Including the Barriers and Enablers.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- [Nursing practices in primary care in remote rural municipalities].Cadernos de saude publica · 2025Article
- Article
46 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterprofessional Primary Care Teams (IPCTs) have been shown to benefit health systems and patients, particularly those patients with complex care needs. The literature suggests a wide range of factors that may influence collaboration in IPCTs, however the evidence base is unclear for many of these factors. To target improvement efforts, we identify studies that demonstrate an association between suggested factors and collaborative processes in IPCTs.
methodsA systematic review of 25 years of peer-review literature was conducted to identify studies that test associations between policy, organizational, care team and individual factors, and collaboration in IPCTs. We searched Medline, ProQuest subject, ProQuest abstract, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, and Embase electronic databases between January 1990 to June 2015 and hand-searched reference lists of identified articles.
resultsThe electronic searches identified 1421 articles, nine of which met inclusion criteria. Eighteen factors were significantly associated with collaboration in at least one article. We present the findings within a proposed conceptual model of interrelated 'gears'. The model offers a taxonomy of factors that policy makers (macro gear), organizational managers (meso gear), care teams (micro gear) and health professionals (individual gear) can adjust to improve interprofessional collaboration in IPC teams. Thirteen of the eighteen identified factors were within the micro gear, or team level of decision-making. These pertained to formal processes such as quality audits and group problem-solving; social processes such as open communication and supportive colleagues; team attitudes such as feeling part of the team; and team structure such as team size and having a collaboration champion or facilitator. Fewer policy (eg governance), organizational (eg information systems, organizational culture) or individual (eg belief in interprofessional collaboration care and personal flexibility) level factors were identified.
conclusionsThe findings suggest that individual IPCTs have opportunities to improve collaboration regardless of the organizational or policy context within which they operate. Evidence supports the importance of having a team vision and shared goals, formal quality processes, information systems, and professionals feeling part of the team. Few studies assessed associations between collaboration and macro and meso factors, or between factors across levels, which are priorities for future research.
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.