SynthesisSystematic reviews2022
Interprofessional collaboration and patient-reported outcomes in inpatient care: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Initial programme theory developing for interprofessional case discussions (InCaD) in acute hospital care: a realist approach.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- The impact of interprofessional collaboration between pharmacists and community health workers on medication adherence: a systematic review.International journal for equity in health · 2025Pooled it
- Interprofessional Education Experience, Self-Rated Knowledge, and Perceived Interprofessional Collaboration Among Health Professions Faculty and Educators: A Cross-Sectional Mixed-Methods Study in Albania and Italy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Dissecting interprofessional anatomy education: insights from AI-driven assessment.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Perceived Communication and Cooperation with Physicians and Nurses and Occupational Outcomes Among Medical Social Workers in China: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Refinement and Preliminary Validation of the Technological Competency as Caring in Healthcare Instrument (TCCHI): Psychometric Evaluation of a Concise Three-Factor Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Primary Care or Primary Problem? Aligning Access Pathways with Patient Needs Across the Care Continuum.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- Interprofessional Collaboration Between Community Health Workers and Pharmacists.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Understanding Nurses' Perceptions of Patient-Centered Care: The Influence of Interprofessional Collaboration.Nursing research and practice · 2026Article
- Perceptions of Child-Adult Relationship Enhancement (CARE) Training Usefulness for Educational, Behavioral, and Allied Health Professionals: Attitudes Toward Evidence-Based Practices.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2025Article
- Selection of initiatives to improve the management of patients with hereditary angioedema by the hospital pharmacy using the nominal group technique.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2025Article
- Evaluating the impact of an interprofessional education intervention on health profession students' perceptions and collaborative competencies in Lebanon: a quasi-experimental study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The Evaluation of a Simulated Interprofessional Education Session Between Dietetics and Acting Students.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Article
- A short elective supports the attitudes of medicine and pharmacy students towards interprofessional learning: a pre-post design.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Determinants of interprofessional collaboration in surgery: A scoping review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Review
- Interprofessional Collaboration and Job Satisfaction in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross-Sectional Survey within the PRiVENT Project.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2025Article
- Interprofessional education at medical faculties in German-speaking countries - institutional challenges and enablers of successful curricular implementation: A mixed-methods study.GMS journal for medical education · 2025Article
- How patients experience nurse-doctor collaborative care at specialist clinics: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Click to consult: psychiatrists' perspectives on how telepsychiatry impacts communication in the emergency department.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterprofessional collaboration (IPC) is seen as the "gold standard" of comprehensive care, but credible evidence concerning the effects on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) is lacking. The aim of this systematic review is to study the effect of IPC on PRO in inpatient care.
methodsWe systematically searched six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science/Social Science Citation Index, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Current Contents (LIVIVO), CINAHL, and Embase) for studies published between 1997 and 2021. Additional studies were identified through citation tracking, manually searching the Internet and Google Scholar, and consultation of experts. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the RoB 2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies (NRS). The included controlled before-and-after study (CBA) was assessed using both the ROBINS-I and the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) quality criteria. Results were synthesized through narrative description, grouping, and thematic analysis of extracted data.
resultsThe search yielded 10,213 records, from which 22 studies (16 RCTs, five NRS, and one CBA) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In all but five studies, RoB was assessed as being high (RoB 2) resp. critical or serious (ROBINS-I). Within these 22 studies, nine inductively derived outcomes were assessed: (i) quality of life, (ii) coping, (iii) functional ability and health status, (iv) psychiatric morbidity, (v) pain, (vi) managing one's own health care, (vii) treatment success, (viii) satisfaction, and (ix) therapeutic relationship. While some studies do not report effect estimates, and some of the reported effects appear to be imprecisely estimated, the overall results indicate that IPC may affect PRO positively across all outcomes.
conclusionsDue to high clinical heterogeneity and high RoB, the question whether IPC affects PRO cannot be answered conclusively. Methodically rigorous studies are needed in order to answer the question of effectiveness of IPC. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017073900.
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.