SynthesisPloS one2017
Assessing the facilitators and barriers of interdisciplinary team working in primary care using normalisation process theory: An integrative review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 56 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
56 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 133 citations in OpenAlex.
- Examining nursing processes in primary care settings using the Chronic Care Model: an umbrella review.BMC primary care · 2023Pooled it
- Conventional and Complementary Medicine Health Care Practitioners' Perspectives on Interprofessional Communication: A Qualitative Rapid Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2019Pooled it
- Exploring the factors affecting the implementation of tobacco and substance use interventions within a secondary school setting: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2017Pooled it
- Effect of the OPTIMAL programme on self-management of multimorbidity in primary care: a randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Trial
- Examining Interprofessional teams structures and processes in the implementation of a primary care intervention (Health TAPESTRY) for older adults using normalization process theory.BMC family practice · 2020Trial
- Task shifting from general practitioners to nurses and the association with patient flow and resource use in out-of-hours primary care clinics: a descriptive register-based study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Adopting tailored interprofessional protocols in general practice: barriers, strategies, and lessons learned from a CFIR-guided qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Grassroots development of interprofessional primary care teams: a qualitative study in Canadian family practices.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- Task shifting from general practitioners to nurses in out-of-hours primary care: an explorative case study of team-based practices.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Article
- Primary care physicians' job satisfaction in eleven Western countries: a cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Collaboration in nursing-home care: perspectives of care professionals - a qualitative study.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- The experience of an innovative interdisciplinary model of primary care delivery in changing organizational dynamics: a grounded theory study.Primary health care research & development · 2025Article
- Health professionals' willingness to share responsibility and strengthen interprofessional collaboration: a cross-sectional survey.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Why is implementing remote monitoring in virtual wards (Hospital at Home) for people living with frailty so hard? Qualitative interview study.Age and ageing · 2025Article
- General practitioners' views on inappropriate prescribing for older patients: a qualitative study through focus groups.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Performance of ChatGPT on Nursing Licensure Examinations in the United States and China: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- The perceptions of nurses and physicians in primary care of rehabilitation for frail older adults.Clinical rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Facilitators and barriers to interprofessional collaboration among health professionals in primary healthcare centers in Qatar: a qualitative exploration using the "Gears" model.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Supporting Patients with Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Pulmonary Disease: Ensuring Best Practice in UK Healthcare Settings.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The Genesis of Multidisciplinary Health Professionals Teams for Pain Management. A History from the Hellenic Antiquity to Modern Palliative Medicine.Acta medica academica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterdisciplinary team working is of paramount importance in the reform of primary care in order to provide cost-effective and comprehensive care. However, international research shows that it is not routine practice in many healthcare jurisdictions. It is imperative to understand levers and barriers to the implementation process. This review examines interdisciplinary team working in practice, in primary care, from the perspective of service providers and analyses 1 barriers and facilitators to implementation of interdisciplinary teams in primary care and 2 the main research gaps. METHODS AND
findingsAn integrative review following the PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Following a search of 10 international databases, 8,827 titles were screened for relevance and 49 met the criteria. Quality of evidence was appraised using predetermined criteria. Data were analysed following the principles of framework analysis using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), which has four constructs: sense making, enrolment, enactment, and appraisal. The literature is dominated by a focus on interdisciplinary working between physicians and nurses. There is a dearth of evidence about all NPT constructs apart from enactment. Physicians play a key role in encouraging the enrolment of others in primary care team working and in enabling effective divisions of labour in the team. The experience of interdisciplinary working emerged as a lever for its implementation, particularly where communication and respect were strong between professionals.
conclusionA key lever for interdisciplinary team working in primary care is to get professionals working together and to learn from each other in practice. However, the evidence base is limited as it does not reflect the experiences of all primary care professionals and it is primarily about the enactment of team working. We need to know much more about the experiences of the full network of primary care professionals regarding all aspects of implementation work. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015019362.
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.