Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28679376›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Managing expectations: cognitive authority and experienced control in complex healthcare processes.

Katherine J Hunt, Carl R May

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A systematic review of the use of burden of treatment theory.Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidity
    Review
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 1 country.

Katherine J HuntFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Building 67 (Nightingale), University Road, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Carl R MayFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Building 67 (Nightingale), University Road, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK. c.r.may@soton.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-0451-2690
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBalancing the normative expectations of others (accountabilities) against the personal and distributed resources available to meet them (capacity) is a ubiquitous feature of social relations in many settings. This is an important problem in the management of long-term conditions, because of widespread problems of non-adherence to treatment regimens. Using long-term conditions as an example, we set out middle range theory of this balancing work.

methodsA middle-range theory was constructed four stages. First, a qualitative elicitation study of men with heart failure was used to develop general propositions about patient and care giver experience, and about the ways that the organisation and delivery of care affected this. Second, these propositions were developed and confirmed through a systematic review of qualitative research literature. Third, theoretical propositions and constructs were built, refined and presented as a logic model associated with two main theoretical propositions. Finally, a construct validation exercise was undertaken, in which construct definitions informed reanalysis of a set of systematic reviews of studies of patient and caregiver experiences of heart failure that had been included in an earlier meta-review.

resultsCognitive Authority Theory identifies, characterises and explains negotiation processes in in which people manage their relations with the expectations of normative systems - like those encountered in the management of long-term conditions. Here, their cognitive authority is the product of an assessment of competence, trustworthiness and credibility made about a person by other participants in a healthcare process; and their experienced control is a function of the degree to which they successfully manage the external process-specific limiting factors that make it difficult to otherwise perform in their role.

conclusionCognitive Authority Theory assists in explaining how participants in complex social processes manage important relational aspects of inequalities in power and expertise. It can play an important part in understanding the dynamics of participation in healthcare processes. It suggests ways in which these burdens may lead to relationally induced non-adherence to treatment regimens and self-care programmes, and points to targets where intervention may reduce these adverse outcomes.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareModels, PsychologicalPatient ComplianceSelf CareCognitionHumansNegotiatingQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID28679376
PMCPMC5498980
OpenAlexW2727454002

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.