Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35404938›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

How, when, and why do inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work? A realist evaluation.

Justin Avery Aunger, Ross Millar, Anne Marie Rafferty, Russell Mannion, Joanne Greenhalgh, Deborah Faulks, Hugh McLeod

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. BMJ open · 2026
    Article
  2. Co-Designing Local Collaboration Between Social Services, Primary Healthcare, and the Third Sector-A Realist Process Evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

Justin Avery AungerSchool of Health Sciences, Surrey Research Park, Surrey, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6975-4570
Ross MillarHealth Services Management Centre, Park House, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Anne Marie RaffertyFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Russell MannionHealth Services Management Centre, Park House, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Joanne GreenhalghSociology and Social Policy Department, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Deborah FaulksEngaging Communities Solutions, Stafford, United Kingdom.
Hugh McLeodPopulation Health Sciences, University of Bristol & NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Funding

Department of Health NIHR127430
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInter-organisational collaborations (IOCs) in healthcare have been viewed as an effective approach to performance improvement. However, there remain gaps in our understanding of what helps IOCs function, as well as how and why contextual elements affect their implementation. A realist review of evidence drawing on 86 sources has sought to elicit and refine context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) to understand and refine these phenomena, yet further understanding can be gained from interviewing those involved in developing IOCs.

methodsWe used a realist evaluation methodology, adopting prior realist synthesis findings as a theoretical framework that we sought to refine. We drew on 32 interviews taking place between January 2020 and May 2021 with 29 stakeholders comprising IOC case studies, service users, as well as regulatory perspectives in England. Using a retroductive analysis approach, we aimed to test CMOCs against these data to explore whether previously identified mechanisms, CMOCs, and causal links between them were affirmed, refuted, or revised, and refine our explanations of how and why interorganisational collaborations are successful.

resultsMost of our prior CMOCs and their underlying mechanisms were supported in the interview findings with a diverse range of evidence. Leadership behaviours, including showing vulnerability and persuasiveness, acted to shape the core mechanisms of collaborative functioning. These included our prior mechanisms of trust, faith, and confidence, which were largely ratified with minor refinements. Action statements were formulated, translating theoretical findings into practical guidance.

conclusionAs the fifth stage in a larger project, our refined theory provides a comprehensive understanding of the causal chain leading to effective collaborative inter-organisational relationships. These findings and recommendations can support implementation of IOCs in the UK and elsewhere. Future research should translate these findings into further practical guidance for implementers, researchers, and policymakers.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareOrganizationsHealth FacilitiesLeadershipTrust

Identifiers

PMID35404938
PMCPMC9000100

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.