ArticleHealth care management review
A taxonomy of hospitals based on partnerships for population health management.
Article in Health care management review. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Hospital Partnerships for Population Health: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of healthcare management / American College of Healthcare ExecutivesPooled it
- Italian healthcare professionals' role in advancing reforms within the Italian National Healthcare System, as outlined in the National Recovery and Resilience Plan.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Differential impact of hospital and community factors on breadth and depth of hospital population health partnerships.Health services research · 2024Article
- Organization Theory for Implementation Science (OTIS): reflections and recommendations.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- What is the performance in public hospitals? A longitudinal analysis of performance plans through topic modeling.BMC health services research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospitals face growing pressures and opportunities to engage with partner organizations in efforts to improve population health at the community level. Variation has been observed in the degree to which hospitals develop such partnerships. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to generate a taxonomy of hospitals based on their partnerships with external organizations, employing the theoretical notion of organizations' focus on exploration versus exploitation. METHODOLOGY: With 1,238 valid cases from the 2015 American Hospital Association Population Health Survey, our study uses items asking about the level of partnership strength for 36 named partner types. Excluding three variables with low reliability, 33 variables are classified into six partner groups by factor analysis. Then, cluster analysis is conducted to generate a taxonomy of hospitals based on their partnerships with the six partner groups.
findingsOf 1,238 hospitals, 26.1% are classified as exploratory hospitals that develop more collaborative relationships with partners outside the medical sector. Exploitative hospitals (18.3%) focus on relationships with traditional medical sector partners. Ambidextrous hospitals (27.0%) develop partnerships both in and outside the medical sector. Finally, independent hospitals (28.6%) do not establish strong partnerships. Larger hospitals, not-for-profit hospitals, and teaching hospitals are more likely to be classified as exploratory. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The four-cluster taxonomy can provide hospital and health system leaders and managers with a better understanding of the wide variation in partnerships that hospitals establish and insights into their different strategic options with regard to partnership development.
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.