Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31327958›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2019

Democratic Accountability in Strategic Coordination Bodies - An Investigation of Governance in Swedish Elder Care.

Staffan Johansson, Andreas Liljegren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Staffan JohanssonDepartment of Social Work, University of Gothenburg, SE.ORCID 0000-0002-8796-507X
Andreas LiljegrenDepartment of Social Work, University of Gothenburg, SE.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The establishment of strategic coordination bodies with members from different agencies and that are governed by various laws and regulations can be understood as an answer to the demand for improved coordinated care for citizens with complex needs, such as frail older people. However, this demand raises fundamental questions of democratic control and accountability in the modern welfare state. Although these issues are addressed in current literature on network governance, they have not been investigated empirically very much. The aim of this paper is to investigate coordination bodies as important actors in integrated care, and especially to investigate how the members of these governance networks perceive their own influence and how they are held accountable by their principals. This study is conceptually built on theories of network governance and accountability. The empirical investigation is based on a survey with 545 respondents from 73 different coordination bodies in Sweden. The analysis shows that there seems to be an imbalance between perceived influence and perceived demands from different stakeholders to account for the services. This imbalance provides an opening for a discussion of how to improve the current situation for vulnerable groups and about new perspectives on accountability and power in the modern welfare state.

Indexed as

accountabilitycoordinated careeldercarenetwork governance

Identifiers

PMID31327958
PMCPMC6625544

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.