ArticleBMC medical education2026
Towards a conceptualisation of collaborative decision-making within interprofessional collaborative practice: a concept analysis using scoping review methodology.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCollaborative decision-making is a term used when patient care decisions are shared between health workers of different backgrounds. Yet, current definitions of collaborative decision-making do not consistently describe the actions involved in the decision-making process or how the term relates to similar terms. This situation makes learning, teaching, and researching this concept difficult. Therefore, this review aims to clarify the concept of collaborative decision-making within interprofessional collaborative practice.
methodsScoping review methodology was used to identify and select relevant literature. Four databases, were searched between Jan 2022 and December 2024 and included peer-reviewed articles that defined, described, or conceptualised collaborative decision-making or related terms. Extracted data were analysed with a concept analysis approach to develop a conceptualisation.
resultsThirty-seven articles were analysed. Collaborative decision-making was conceptualised as a dynamic and iterative social and cognitive process involving two or more participants from different backgrounds who prioritise their time to discuss and agree on the next steps in patient care. This process includes four core actions: (1) sharing profession specific knowledge and perspectives, (2) integrating knowledge and perspectives to create new and shared knowledge, (3) deliberating over options, and (4) negotiating differences to reach agreement. DISCUSSION: This conceptualisation clarifies collaborative decision-making as a unifying term for how decisions are shared within interprofessional collaborative practice. It shows that many related terms draw on a common conceptual base. It therefore offers educators a language and framework for making collaborative decision-making explicit to learners and provides researchers with greater conceptual clarity.
conclusionThis review produced a contemporary conceptualisation of collaborative decision-making for others to use when learning, teaching and researching this key component of interprofessional collaborative practice.
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.