Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37291607›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of mental health systems2023

Values and practice of collaboration in a mental health care system in the Netherlands: a qualitative study.

Suzanne J C Kroon, Manna A Alma, Meike Bak, Lian van der Krieke, Richard Bruggeman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of mental health systems, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Suzanne J C KroonDepartment of Psychiatry, Rob Giel Research Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. s.j.c.kroon@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3355-3205
Manna A AlmaDepartment of Health Sciences, Applied Health Research , University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8203-2713
Meike BakDepartment of Psychiatry, Rob Giel Research Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Lian van der KriekeDepartment of Psychiatry, Rob Giel Research Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6745-5913
Richard BruggemanDepartment of Psychiatry, Rob Giel Research Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3238-8471

Funding

ZonMw number 638075029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo offer optimal care, the mental health system needs new routes for collaboration, involving both interprofessional and interorganizational aspects. The transition from intramural to extramural mental health care has given rise to new dynamics between public and mental health care, introducing a challenge for interprofessional and interorganizational collaboration. This study aims to determine values and expectations of collaboration and to understand how collaboration in mental health care organizations takes shape in daily practice.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and a focus group, in the setting of the Program for Mentally Vulnerable Persons (PMV). Data were analysed following thematic analysis.

resultsWe found three aspect that were considered important in collaboration: commonality, relationships, and psychological ownership. However, our findings indicate a discrepancy between what is considered essential in collaboration and how this materializes in day-to-day practice: collaboration appears to be less manageable than anticipated by interviewees. Our data suggest psychological ownership should be added as value to the interorganizational collaboration theory.

conclusionOur study offers a new definition of collaboration and adding "psychological ownership" to the existing literature on collaboration theory. Furthermore, we gained insight into how collaboration between different organizations works in practice. Our research points to a discrepancy between what all the partners find important in collaboration, and what they actually do in practice. Finally, we expressed ways to improve the collaboration, such as choosing between a chain or a network approach and acting on it and re-highlighting the goal of the Program Mentally Vulnerable persons.

Indexed as

CollaborationEcosystemMental health care systemQualitative studyTransition

Identifiers

PMID37291607
PMCPMC10249202

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.