Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42004041›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care

Involving Citizens in Integrated Care. Lessons Learned Through Participatory Action Research in Three Communities in the Netherlands.

Geert M Rutten, Ellen van Wijk, Saskia Sleijster, Dorien L Oostra, Janine Roenhorst, Marloes Kleinjan, Miranda Laurant

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Geert M RuttenSchool of Health Studies, HAN University of Applied Science, P.O. Box 6960, NL 6503GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5971-5944
Ellen van WijkSchool of Health Studies, HAN University of Applied Science, P.O. Box 6960, NL 6503GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4159-9166
Saskia SleijsterSchool of Health Studies, HAN University of Applied Science, P.O. Box 6960, NL 6503GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Dorien L OostraSchool of Health Studies, HAN University of Applied Science, P.O. Box 6960, NL 6503GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2463-7690
Janine RoenhorstSchool of Health Studies, HAN University of Applied Science, P.O. Box 6960, NL 6503GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1388-678X
Marloes KleinjanSchool of Health Studies, HAN University of Applied Science, P.O. Box 6960, NL 6503GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4545-5549
Miranda LaurantMiranda Laurant Coaching and Healing, Druten, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8826-3352

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In response to rising healthcare demands, alternative health system models are needed. This study aims to investigate the development of community-involved, cross-domain networks, and to identify factors that facilitate or hamper their growth and sustainability. Methods: This participatory action research used purposive sampling to select three diverse networks. A multi-methods approach of document analysis, observations, dialogue and twenty semi-structured interviews across the networks was applied. The ESSA-framework (Exploring, Shaping, Strengthening, Anchoring) of network development was used to track progression across its stages. Reflexivity was ensured through discussions with the networks, an advisory board, and the study's steering committee. Results: All networks advanced by one ESSA phase; however, one only progressed in interprofessional collaboration. Key factors affecting network development included a shared sense of urgency and community, mode of collaboration, essential roles, and a mix of competencies. Discussion: The limited number of networks limits external validity, yet their diversity, and the mixed methods and reflexivity revealed profound insights into community-involved cross-domain network development. Conclusion: Community-involved cross-domain network development is complex and requires felt urgency, patience and perseverance from all participants. Early engagement of both professionals and citizens is required, supported by network leadership and change-agent skills to drive development.

Indexed as

citizen involvementcross-domain collaborationintegrated care

Identifiers

PMID42004041
PMCPMC13089367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.