ArticleInternational journal of integrated care
Which Inter-Organisational Characteristics Supported More Effective Implementation of a New Zealand Falls and Fractures Prevention Programme? Applying and Adapting the Context and Capabilities for Integrated Care Framework.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Why do integrated care programmes succeed in some settings but not others, even when national leadership and funding are aligned? This persistent question shaped our examination of the New Zealand Falls and Fracture Prevention Programme (FFPP), a complex, cross-sector initiative targeting older adults. We applied and extended the Context and Capabilities for Integrating Care (CCIC) framework to explore how organisational and inter-organisational factors contributed to variation in implementation and outcomes. Method: We conducted a qualitative comparative case study of four large districts with differences in FFPP implementation including 28 semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was primarily deductive, using the CCIC framework, but remained open to emergent, context-specific themes. Results: We identified 43 organisational and implementation factors, of which five had a particularly important effect on FFPP implementation and outcomes: a well-structured governance team, collaborative leadership, engagement with primary care and private organisations, positive prior collaboration experience, and applying a population-based approach. We modified the CCIC framework to more fully reflect our observations by adding prior collaboration experience and a life-cycle approach (from pre-engagement to establishment). Conclusion: The CCIC framework captured most key organisational dynamics but was enhanced by incorporating temporal and historical dimensions of collaboration.
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.