ArticleBMJ open2016
The basis of clinical tribalism, hierarchy and stereotyping: a laboratory-controlled teamwork experiment.
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.
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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Lived Experiences of Clinical Nurse Educators Facilitating Interprofessional Simulation: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis Study.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- Advancing Clinical Competence Through Interprofessional Education: Perspectives and Experiences of Healthcare Professionals and Clinical Educators.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Machiavellianism in Healthcare: A Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Enhancing Interprofessional Education: Insights from Students at the College of Medicine and Health Sciences at the University of Rwanda.Rwanda journal of medicine and health sciences · 2025Article
- 'It Takes a Village to Raise a Resident': Lessons Learned on Interprofessional Socialization and Collaborative Practice from Recent Medical Graduates.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Managing obstetric bleeding in Wales: A qualitative evaluation of the OBS Cymru care bundle using Normalisation Process Theory.PloS one · 2025Article
- Self-assessment and learning motivation in emergency point-of-care ultrasound: an online pilot investigation in German physicians.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Interaction between overconfidence effects and training formats in nurses' education in hand hygiene.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Investigating the use of actor-network theory in healthcare: a protocol for a systematic review.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Learning motivation and self-assessment in health economics: a survey on overconfidence in healthcare providers.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Committee experiences of using formal consensus in healthcare guidelines: a longitudinal qualitative study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Overconfidence effects and learning motivation refreshing BLS: An observational questionnaire study.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
- Exploring healthcare staff narratives to gain an in-depth understanding of changing multidisciplinary team power dynamics during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- The impact of vulnerability and exposure to pervasive interprofessional incivility among medical staff on wellbeing.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Harnessing a clinician-led governance model to overcome healthcare tribalism and drive innovation: a case study of Northumbria NHS Foundation Trust.Journal of health organization and management · 2022Article
- 'Us versus them': A social identity perspective of internal medicine trainees.Perspectives on medical education · 2022Article
- Self-Assessment and Learning Motivation in the Second Victim Phenomenon.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Allied health assistants' perspectives of their role in healthcare settings: A qualitative study.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Scoping review to identify strategies and interventions improving interprofessional collaboration and integration in primary care.BMJ open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.