Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35698115›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2022

Interprofessional collaboration in the breast cancer unit: how do healthcare workers see it?

Dea Anita Ariani Kurniasih, Elsa Pudji Setiawati, Ivan Surya Pradipta, Anas Subarnas

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. An Exploration of the Pillars of Leadership in Cancer Education.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dea Anita Ariani KurniasihDepartment of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Raya Bandung Sumedang Km. 21, Hegarmanah, Jatinangor, Kabupaten Sumedang, 45363, Jawa Barat, Indonesia.
Elsa Pudji SetiawatiDepartment of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang, Indonesia.
Ivan Surya PradiptaDepartment of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Raya Bandung Sumedang Km. 21, Hegarmanah, Jatinangor, Kabupaten Sumedang, 45363, Jawa Barat, Indonesia.
Anas SubarnasDepartment of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Raya Bandung Sumedang Km. 21, Hegarmanah, Jatinangor, Kabupaten Sumedang, 45363, Jawa Barat, Indonesia. a.subarnas@unpad.ac.id.
Padjadjaran University · ID

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterprofessional collaboration has an important role in health care for breast cancer patients who are undergoing treatment at the hospital. Interprofessional collaboration has been reported to provide significant benefits for patients. However, qualitative research on interprofessional collaboration in the breast cancer department is rarely done, therefore, a study was conducted to determine the perception of health practitioners about interprofessional collaboration in the breast care unit at a referral centre hospital in West Java, Indonesia.

methodsA qualitative study was carried out using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) with 15 healthcare personnel using total sampling. Participants were chosen among healthcare professionals who treat and in charge for outpatient breast cancer, but were not resident physicians. The FGD approach was used for nurses and pharmacists, and interviews were used for oncologists. The audio recordings of all interviews and FGDs were transcribed verbatim and evaluated using thematic analysis.

resultThe findings were categorized into two categories to obtain health care workers' perspectives on interprofessional collaboration: (1) impediment factors: personality, lack of leadership, seniority, healthcare workers with double positions, the need for a clinical meeting, hospital bureaucracy, national health insurance implementation, issues with patients, hospital infrastructure, and evaluation and synchronisation; (2) existing supportive elements: effective cooperation, effective communication, clear job description, interpersonal relationships, Standard Operational Procedure (SOP) for cancer therapy, legality for inter-discipline cancer team, professional responsibility, integrated clinical pathway, patient centred care, and comprehensive health services.

conclusionsInterprofessional collaboration was seen positively by the respondents. However, there are several hurdles that must be overcome to apply interprofessional collaboration works effectively. The findings of this study can be used to build interprofessional collaborations targeted at enhancing quality health care in breast cancer units.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsInterprofessional RelationsAttitude of Health PersonnelCooperative BehaviorFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansPatient Care TeamPharmacistsQualitative ResearchHealth practitionersIndonesiaInterprofessional collaborationQualitative

Identifiers

PMID35698115
PMCPMC9195208
OpenAlexW4282591230

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.