Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38012670›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2023

Adopting standardized cancer patient pathways as a policy at different organizational levels in the Swedish Health System.

Petter Fjällström, Anna-Britt Coe, Mikael Lilja, Senada Hajdarevic

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Petter FjällströmDepartment of Nursing, Umeå University, SE 90187, Umeå, Sweden. Petter.fjallstrom@umu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3503-7164
Anna-Britt CoeDepartment of Sociology, Umeå University, SE 90187, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1975-9060
Mikael LiljaDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Unit of Research, Education, and Development, Östersund Hospital, Umeå University, SE 90187, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5203-9877
Senada HajdarevicDepartment of Nursing, Umeå University, SE 90187, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0661-8269
Umeå University · SE

Funding

A regional agreement between Umeå University and Västerbotten County Council (ALF) RV-731891A regional agreement between Umeå University and Västerbotten County Council (ALF) RV-744851A regional agreement between Umeå University and Västerbotten County Council (ALF) RV-855211A regional agreement between Umeå University and Västerbotten County Council (ALF) RV-931881A regional agreement between Umeå University and Västerbotten County Council (ALF) RV-939898Cancer Research Foundation in Northern Sweden LP-18-2193Healthcare Region of Northern Sweden (VISARE NORR) 838121Healthcare Region of Northern Sweden (VISARE NORR) 929986Healthcare Region of Northern Sweden (VISARE NORR) 939897
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStandardized cancer patient pathways as a new policy has been adopted in healthcare to improve the quality of cancer care. Within the health systems, actors at different levels manage the adoption of new policies to develop healthcare. The various actors on different levels play an important role and influence the policy adoption process. Thus, knowledge about how these actors use strategies when adopting cancer patient pathways as a policy in the health system becomes central.

methodThe study's aim was to explore how actors at different organizational levels in the health system adopted cancer patient pathways. Our overarching case was the Swedish health system at the national, regional, and local levels. Constructivist Grounded Theory Method was used to collect and analyze qualitative interviews with persons working in organizations directly involved in adopting cancer patient pathways at each level. Twelve individual and nine group interviews were conducted including 53 participants.

resultsOrganizational actors at three different levels used distinct strategies during the adoption of cancer patient pathways: acting as-missionaries, fixers, and doers. Acting as missionaries consisted of preaching the idea of cancer patient pathways and framing it with a common purpose to agree upon. Acting as fixers entailed creating a space to put cancer patient pathways into practice and overcome challenges to this. Acting as doers comprised balancing breadth and speed in healthcare provision with not being involved in the development of cancer patient pathways for the local context. These strategies were not developed in isolation from the other organizational levels but rather, each level interacted with one another.

conclusionsWhen adopting new policies, it is important to be aware of the different strategies and actors at various organizational levels in health systems. Even when actors on different levels developed separate strategies, if these contribute to fulfilling the four domains of inter-organizational collaboration, they can work well together to adopt new policies. Our study highlighted that the application of two domains was lacking, which meant that local actors were not sufficiently involved in collaboration, thus constricting the local use and optimization of cancer patient pathways in practice.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareNeoplasmsGovernment ProgramsHealth PolicyHumansOrganizationsPolicySwedenCollaborationGrounded theory methodHealth systemsOrganizational levelsOrganizational policyPrimary health careStrategies

Identifiers

PMID38012670
PMCPMC10680238
OpenAlexW4389052178

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.