ArticleBMC palliative care2017
Ward social workers' views of what facilitates or hinders collaboration with specialist palliative care team social workers: A grounded theory.
Article in BMC palliative care, 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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interprofessional collaboration between hospital-based palliative care teams and hospital ward staff: A realist review.PloS one · 2025Review
- A Social Capital Perspective on Social-Medical Collaboration in Community End-of-Life Care in Hong Kong.Omega · 2024Article
- Impact of Electronic Health Records on Information Practices in Mental Health Contexts: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Impact, challenges and limits of inpatient palliative care consultations - perspectives of requesting and conducting physicians.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Effective Inpatient Palliative Care Consultations: A Qualitative Analysis of Interviews With Palliative Care and Nonpalliative Care Providers.The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInpatient, generalist social workers in discharge planning roles work alongside specialist palliative care social workers to care for patients, often resulting in two social workers being concurrently involved in the same patient's care. Previous studies identifying components of effective collaboration, which impacts patient outcomes, care efficiency, professional job satisfaction, and healthcare costs, were conducted with nurses and physicians but not social workers. This study explores ward social workers' perceptions of what facilitates or hinders collaboration with palliative care social workers.
methodsGrounded theory was used to explore the research aim. In-depth qualitative interviews with masters trained ward social workers (n = 14) working in six hospitals located in the Midwest, United States were conducted between February 2014 and January 2015. A theoretical model of ward social workers' collaboration with palliative care social workers was developed.
resultsThe emerging model of collaboration consists of: 1) trust, which is comprised of a) ability, b) benevolence, and c) integrity, 2) information sharing, and 3) role negotiation. Effective collaboration occurs when all elements of the model are present.
conclusionCollaboration is facilitated when ward social workers' perceptions of trust are high, pertinent information is communicated in a time-sensitive manner, and a flexible approach to roles is taken. The theoretical model of collaboration can inform organisational policy and social work clinical practice guidelines, and may be of use to other healthcare professionals, as improvements in collaboration among healthcare providers may have a positive impact on patient outcomes.
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.