ArticleHuman resources for health2021
Interprofessional collaboration among health professionals in cleft lip and palate treatment and care in the public health sector of South Africa.
Article in Human resources for health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Goslon Yardstick and Cephalometric Analysis in Nonsyndromic Unilateral Cleft lip and Palate Individuals in the Western Cape, South Africa.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
- What Parents of Children Born with a Cleft Lip and/or Palate Want to Know About the Care for their Child.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2025Article
- Interprofessional Competencies for Effective Interprofessional Collaborative Practices Amongst Intensive Care Unit Teams in the North West Province, South Africa: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Health services insights · 2025Article
- Exploring variations in IPC competencies: a cross-sectional study among healthcare professionals in Northwest China.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Improving Craniofacial Team Collaboration: A Multicenter Interview Study of Effective Team Meetings.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Review
- Leadership Development Strategies in Interprofessional Healthcare Collaboration: A Rapid Review.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2023Review
- Coproduction in the management of individuals with cleft lip and palate in South Africa: the Ekhaya Lethu model.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCollaboration among different categories of health professionals is essential for quality patient care, especially for individuals with cleft lip and palate (CLP). This study examined interprofessional collaboration (IPC) among health professionals in all CLP specialised centres in South Africa's public health sector.
methodsDuring 2017, a survey was conducted among health professionals at all the specialised CLP centres in South Africa's public health sector. Following informed consent, each member of the CLP team completed a self-administered questionnaire on IPC, using the Interprofessional Competency Framework Self-Assessment Tool. The IPC questionnaire consists of seven domains with 51 items: care expertise (8 items); shared power (4 items); collaborative leadership (10 items); shared decision-making (2 items); optimising professional role and scope (10 items); effective group function (9 items); and competent communication (8 items). STATA
resultsWe obtained an 87% response rate, and 52 participants completed the questionnaire. The majority of participants were female 52% (n = 27); with a mean age of 41.9 years (range 22-72). Plastic surgeons accounted for 38.5% of all study participants, followed by speech therapists (23.1%), and professional nurses (9.6%). The lowest mean score of 2.55 was obtained for effective group function (SD + -0.50), and the highest mean score of 2.92 for care expertise (SD + -0.37). Explanatory factor analysis showed that gender did not influence IPC, but category of health professional predicted scores on the five categories of shared power (p = 0.01), collaborative leadership (p = 0.04), optimising professional role and scope (p = 0.03), effective group function (p = 0.01) and effective communication (p = 0.04).
conclusionThe seven IPC categories could be used as a guide to develop specific strategies to enhance IPC among CLP teams. Institutional support and leadership combined with patient-centred, continuing professional development in multi-disciplinary meetings will also enrich IPC.
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.