Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42116087›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2026

Collaboration between healthcare citizen initiatives and primary healthcare care providers: semi-structured interviews and focus groups with Dutch stakeholders.

Jeffrey Bouwmeester, Marianne K Dees, Hugo W Stappers, Maria E T C van den Muijsenbergh, Taco Brandsen, Kirsten E Bevelander

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Jeffrey BouwmeesterDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, 6527 EZ, the Netherlands.
Marianne K DeesDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, 6527 EZ, the Netherlands. marianne.dees@radboudumc.nl.
Hugo W StappersDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, 6527 EZ, the Netherlands.
Maria E T C van den MuijsenberghDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, 6527 EZ, the Netherlands.
Taco BrandsenDepartment of Public Administration, Institute for Management Research, Radboud University, Heyendaalseweg 141, Nijmegen, 6525 AJ, the Netherlands.
Kirsten E BevelanderDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, 6527 EZ, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare and welfare citizen initiatives are citizen-led efforts to improve community well-being. Concerns have, however, been voiced about the effectiveness and inclusivity of these initiatives, suggesting that collaboration with primary healthcare providers could be beneficial to both. Nevertheless, elements that support collaborations between citizen initiatives and primary care providers remain understudied. Our study therefore focuses on delineating elements influencing such collaborations, as perceived by initiative initiators, primary care providers, disadvantaged citizens, and people acting as boundary spanners. Our research question is: What elements influence collaboration between healthcare and welfare citizen initiatives and primary health care providers?

methodsA combination of semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with community stakeholders was used. Transcripts were analysed thematically.

resultsA total of 35 people participated, of whom five were interviewed individually, four were interviewed in duo-interviews, and 26 participated in focus groups. We found that citizens' motives to establish or partake in citizen initiatives, and primary care providers' motives to collaborate with them, are dependent on the position of these stakeholders in the healthcare and welfare field, the degree of citizen and professional autonomy, and personal convictions. Furthermore, the inclusivity of citizen initiatives is an important element in increasing professionals' motivation to collaborate. Citizen initiators consider primary care providers as potentially valuable partners, but differences in perceived status, funding arrangements, and conceptions of professional distancing hamper collaborations. Moreover, elements that support the connectedness between citizen initiatives and primary care providers, e.g., using understandable language or personnel continuity, are largely comparable to those that support the inclusivity of initiatives. Nevertheless, institutional support is essential to facilitate key requirements for collaboration such as mutual learning opportunities, supportive accountability structures, and capacity to collaborate.

conclusionCollaborations between healthcare and welfare citizen initiatives and primary care providers could be beneficial to both and require mutual change processes. Safely extending professional boundaries, appreciating citizen autonomy, exploring similarities between citizen-professional connectedness and inclusivity, and focusing on learning-by-doing to provide empirical evidence for institutional stakeholders will support these innovative collaborations.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationCooperative BehaviorHealth PersonnelPrimary Health CareFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleNetherlandsQualitative ResearchCitizen InitiativesCollaborationDisadvantaged CitizensPrimary Healthcare Providers

Identifiers

PMID42116087
PMCPMC13335276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.