ArticleSAGE open medicine2019
Profiling mental health professionals in relation to perceived interprofessional collaboration on teams.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Models of care in Canadian hospitals: an exploration of current practice and future directions.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Feasibility and effectiveness of an interprofessional educational program on perinatal mental health: perspectives of health students in two African countries.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Unpacking the black box of interprofessional collaboration within healthcare networks: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Which psychological needs profile exhibits higher engagement and favorable attitudes toward interprofessional education? A cluster analysis among health and social care Hong Kong students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Psychometric Properties of the German Version of the Perception of Interprofessional Collaboration Model-Questionnaire (PINCOM-Q).International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims at identifying profiles of mental health professionals based on individual, interactional, structural and professional role characteristics related to interprofessional collaboration.
methodsMental health professionals (
resultsCluster analysis identified four profiles of mental health professionals. Those with the highest interprofessional collaboration scores comprised two profiles labeled "highly collaborative female professionals with fewer conflicts and more knowledge sharing and integration" and "highly collaborative male professionals with fewer conflicts, more participation in decision-making and mutual trust." By contrast, the profile labeled "slightly collaborative professionals with high seniority, many conflicts and less knowledge integration and mutual trust" had the lowest interprofessional collaboration score. Another profile positioned between these groups was identified as "moderately collaborative female psychosocial professionals with less participation in decision-making." DISCUSSION AND
conclusionOrganizational support, participation in decision-making, knowledge sharing, knowledge integration, mutual trust, affective commitment toward the team, professional diversity and belief in the benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration were features associated with profiles where perceived interprofessional collaboration was higher. These team qualities should be strongly encouraged by mental health managers for improving interprofessional collaboration. Training is also needed to promote improvement in interprofessional collaboration competencies.
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.