ArticleInternational journal of integrated care
Developing Collaborative Practices in Co-Located Health and Social Services: An Observational Study of a Multidisciplinary Development Group.
Article in International journal of integrated care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Despite ongoing efforts to integrate health and social services, achieving integration in front-line practice remains challenging. This study explored collaboration in a multidisciplinary development group aimed at improving collaboration in one co-located health and social services centre in Helsinki, Finland. Drawing on the notion of knowledge practices as means for solving complex issues, the study analysed how collaboration and co-development are enacted within the group. Description: Observational data collected from 11 development workshops were analysed using an abductive approach. The analysis identified three modes of collaboration: 1) one-sided knowledge sharing, 2) collaborative knowledge sharing, and 3) collaborative knowledge creation. Discussion: Shared concepts and a new multidisciplinary service process supported collaborative modes for working, while some facilitation practices seemed to hinder them. The findings revealed a gap between the ideal of bottom-up development and the organisational conditions influencing it. A clear mandate and purposeful facilitation are critical to achieving the intended goals of such development initiatives. Conclusion: Stronger theoretical foundations and explicit theories of change could enhance development efforts. This study identified theoretical concepts that illuminate collaboration as a contextually shaped set of social practices. These insights can contribute to the design and facilitation of practice-based development efforts.
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.