Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27473955›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

The basis of clinical tribalism, hierarchy and stereotyping: a laboratory-controlled teamwork experiment.

Jeffrey Braithwaite, Robyn Clay-Williams, Elia Vecellio, Danielle Marks, Tamara Hooper, Mary Westbrook, Johanna Westbrook, Brette Blakely, Kristiana Ludlow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Machiavellianism in Healthcare: A Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Self-Assessment and Learning Motivation in the Second Victim Phenomenon.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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

9 authors.

Jeffrey BraithwaiteCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Robyn Clay-WilliamsCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Elia VecellioSouth Eastern Area Laboratory Services, NSW Health Pathology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Danielle MarksCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Tamara HooperCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mary WestbrookCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Johanna WestbrookCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Brette BlakelyCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Kristiana LudlowCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine the basis of multidisciplinary teamwork. In real-world healthcare settings, clinicians often cluster in profession-based tribal silos, form hierarchies and exhibit stereotypical behaviours. It is not clear whether these social structures are more a product of inherent characteristics of the individuals or groups comprising the professions, or attributable to a greater extent to workplace factors.

settingControlled laboratory environment with well-appointed, quiet rooms and video and audio equipment.

participantsClinical professionals (n=133) divided into 35 groups of doctors, nurses and allied health professions, or mixed professions.

interventionsParticipants engaged in one of three team tasks, and their performance was video-recorded and assessed. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY MEASURES: Primary: teamwork performance. Secondary, pre-experimental: a bank of personality questionnaires designed to assess participants' individual differences. Postexperimental: the 16-item Mayo High Performance Teamwork Scale (MHPTS) to measure teamwork skills; this was self-assessed by participants and also by external raters. In addition, external, arm's length blinded observations of the videotapes were conducted.

resultsAt baseline, there were few significant differences between the professions in collective orientation, most of the personality factors, Machiavellianism and conservatism. Teams generally functioned well, with effective relationships, and exhibited little by way of discernible tribal or hierarchical behaviours, and no obvious differences between groups (F (3, 31)=0.94, p=0.43).

conclusionsOnce clinicians are taken out of the workplace and put in controlled settings, tribalism, hierarchical and stereotype behaviours largely dissolve. It is unwise therefore to attribute these factors to fundamental sociological or psychological differences between individuals in the professions, or aggregated group differences. Workplace cultures are more likely to be influential in shaping such behaviours. The results underscore the importance of culture and context in improvement activities. Future initiatives should factor in culture and context as well as individuals' or professions' characteristics as the basis for inducing more lateral teamwork or better interprofessional collaboration.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelOrganizational CulturePatient Care TeamAustraliaCooperative BehaviorHumansInterprofessional RelationsLeadershipQualitative ResearchTask Performance and AnalysisVideo Recordingpatient safetyquality improvementteamsteamwork

Identifiers

PMID27473955
PMCPMC4985874

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.