ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2026
Generative listening leading to generative action to enhance interdisciplinary connections in a specialized referral hospital setting.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo contribute to the organizational culture and interdisciplinary connections to surpass frontiers created by evolving specialization that put professionals as well as processes apart. In addition, we preserved and stimulated local established professional skills.
methodsThe authors worked by listening to organizational demands as well as demands of colleagues at work in a network organizational non-mandatory working weekly forums through videoconferences. Forums were devoted to specific scenarios, such as surgical center facilities, outpatient clinics, hybrid rooms, clinical directors, multidisciplinary leadership, intensive care units' leadership, and institutional life. Mandatory (by local regulation) subcommittee forums occurred every two weeks. Participants of the meetings were in their working place. Every leadership would be present at most in two forums each week; participation might rotate between local leaderships.
results200 interdisciplinary nonmandatory working forums were carried out in 2024; number of invites ranged between 52 (hybrid room) and 131 (clinical units' leadership), participations ranged between 718 (hybrid room) and 791 (clinical units leadership) and mean participation ranged between 17.4 (range 11‒25; standard deviation 3.21) and 20.1 (range 11‒27; standard deviation 3.40). Hundred six mandatory forums were carried out in 2024; the number of invites ranged between 10 (subcommittee of pharmacology) and 19 (review of mortality); mean participation ranged between 9 (range 5‒12; standard deviation 2.16) and 11.7 (range 6‒15; standard deviation 2.24). Specific practical initiatives were born from these forums.
conclusionsThe authors consider that interdisciplinary connectivity was participative to a shared understanding of processes and associated requirements.
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.