Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37464146›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2023

"Because There's Experts That Do That": Lessons Learned by Health Care Organizations When Partnering with Community Organizations.

Laura B Beidler, Caroline Fichtenberg, Taressa K Fraze

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laura B BeidlerThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, NH, Lebanon, USA.
Caroline FichtenbergDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, CA, San Francisco, USA.
Taressa K FrazeDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, CA, San Francisco, USA. Taressa.Fraze@ucsf.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8346-6425
University of California, San Francisco · USDartmouth College · US

Funding

PA-20-072: Accelerating the Use of Evidence-based Innovation in Healthcare SystemsU19HS024075 · AHRQ · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI MEARA, ELLEN R. · 2015 to 2021
$19.8M
AHRQ HHS U19 HS024075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care organizations' partnerships with community-based organizations (CBOs) are increasingly viewed as key to improving patients' social needs (e.g., food, housing, and economic insecurity). Despite this reliance on CBOs, little research explores the relationships that health care organizations develop with CBOs.

objectiveUnderstand how health care organizations interact with CBOs to implement social care.

designThirty-three semi-structured telephone interviews collected April-July 2019.

participantsAdministrators at 29 diverse health care organizations with active programming related to improving patients' social needs. Organizations ranged from multi-state systems to single-site practices and differed in structure, size, ownership, and geography. MEASURES: Structure and goals of health care organizations' relationship with CBOs.

resultsMost health care organizations (26 out of 29) relied on CBOs to improve their patients' social needs. Health care organization's goals for social care activities drove their relationships with CBOs. First, one-way referrals to CBOs did not require formal relationships or frequent interactions with CBOs. Second, when health care organizations contracted with CBOs to deliver discrete services, leadership-level relationships were required to launch programs while staff-to-staff interactions were used to maintain programs. Third, some health care organizations engaged in community-level activities with multiple CBOs which required more expansive, ongoing leadership-level partnerships. Administrators highlighted 4 recommendations for collaborating with CBOs: (1) engage early; (2) establish shared purpose for the collaboration; (3) determine who is best suited to lead activities; and (4) avoid making assumptions about partner organizations.

conclusionsHealth care organizations tailored the intensity of their relationships with CBOs based on their goals. Administrators viewed informal relationships with limited interactions between organizations sufficient for many activities. Our study offers key insights into how and when health care organizations may want to develop partnerships with CBOs.

Indexed as

Community-Institutional RelationsDelivery of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID37464146
PMCPMC10682338
OpenAlexW4384662424

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.