ReviewFuture healthcare journal2025
Interventional strategies for the management of the disruptive physician: A systematic review.
Review in Future healthcare journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The all-encompassing vision ofFuture healthcare journal · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify and evaluate published interventional strategies that address disruptive physician behaviour. Methods and materials: This study was designed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. A comprehensive literature search of publications from January 2013 to November 2023 was undertaken to identify original peer-reviewed studies pertaining to the development and implementation of targeted strategies for the management of disruptive physicians. An interpretive synthesis of the available publications was then presented in both tabular and descriptive format. Results: Among the 1,005 original articles that entered the final selection process, a total of 998 were then excluded because they were focused solely on the characterisation of disruptive behaviour (n=399); limited to trainees (n=258), limited to ancillary staff (n=135); concentrated on prevention (n=111); and described consequences (n=95). A total of seven original publications thus met criteria for inclusion and differed in their design, methods and endpoints. Two articles reported on longitudinal experiences involving prospective data. The most commonly identified themes related to accountability (five studies), organisational commitment (four studies) and professionalism training (three studies), with most studies covering more than one item. Conclusions: Given the practical scope of this problem, a relative lack of publications exist focused on remediation strategies for disruptive physician behaviour. Investment in the development of evidence-based programmes are warranted.
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.