Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39136179›Full record

ArticleHealthcare management forum2025

Approaching collaboration in primary care differently: Exploring boundaries and boundary objects.

Monique Walsh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare management forum, 2025. 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
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.

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

1 author.

Monique WalshUniversity of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0009-0003-5381-3531

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent primary care policy, collaboration is often understood as an outcome, such as the delivery of team-based care or an integrated health system. This outcome-based understanding of collaboration in policy has proven challenging to achieve in practice. This article introduces the concepts of constructing boundaries and boundary objects used in other disciplines, to support our understanding of collaboration by observing the collaborative process. Multiple methods, such as semi-structured interviews, discourse analysis, and member-checking, were used to compare primary care collaborations across three distinct time periods during the onset of COVID-19 within Interior British Columbia. Data analysis revealed the changing nature of boundaries and boundary objects, providing insights into the collaborative process. Through the exploration of boundaries and boundary objects, this article provides a way to approach collaboration in practice differently. By better understanding the process of collaboration, this research could potentially improve collaborative outcomes.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorCOVID-19Primary Health CareSARS-CoV-2British ColumbiaHumansInterviews as TopicPatient Care TeamQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID39136179
PMCPMC11650902

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.