ReviewJournal of health services research & policy2022
The social networks of hospital staff: A realist synthesis.
Review in Journal of health services research & policy, 2022. 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.
- Implementing a change process to support respectful communication in newborn units in Kenya: A qualitative study.International journal of nursing studies · 2026Article
- Understanding the relational culture of healthcare workplaces: a framework to guide improvement interventions, derived from a realist evaluation of neonatal care in Kenya.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Communication Between Anaesthesia Providers for Clinical and Professional Purposes: A Scoping Review.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2025Review
- Protective Factors of Nurses' Mental Health and Professional Wellbeing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicenter Longitudinal Study.International journal of public health · 2024Article
- Protocol for the Pathways Study: a realist evaluation of staff social ties and communication in the delivery of neonatal care in Kenya.BMJ open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe social ties people have with one another are known to influence behaviour, and how information is accessed and interpreted. It is unclear, however, how the social networks that exist in multi-professional health care workplaces might be used to improve quality in hospitals. This paper develops explanatory theory using realist synthesis to illuminate the details and significance of the social ties between health care workers. Specifically we ask: How, why, for whom, to what extent and in what context, do the social ties of staff within a hospital influence quality of service delivery, including quality improvement?
methodsFrom a total of 75 included documents identified through an extensive systematic literature search, data were extracted and analysed to identify emergent explanatory statements.
resultsThe synthesis found that within the hospital workforce, an individual's place in the social whole can be understood across four identified domains: (1) social group, (2) hierarchy, (3) bridging distance and (4) discourse. Thirty-five context-mechanism-outcome configurations were developed across these domains.
conclusionsThe relative position of individual health care workers within the overall social network in hospitals is associated with influence and agency. As such, power to bring about change is inequitably and socially situated, and subject to specific contexts. The findings of this realist synthesis offer a lens through which to understand social ties in hospitals. The findings can help identify possible strategies for intervention to improve communication and distribution of power, for individual, team and wider multi-professional behavioural change in hospitals.
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.