ArticleThe European journal of general practice2026
A new way of thinking? Exploring professionals' perspectives on the sustainability of interprofessional team meetings: A focus group study.
Article in The European journal of general practice, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterprofessional collaboration is essential to address the complex challenges in primary care. One widely used method for this purpose is interprofessional team meetings. Although the benefits are generally known, maintaining these meetings after their introduction remains challenging.
objectiveTo understand the aspects influencing the sustainability of interprofessional team meetings.
methodsAn exploratory qualitative study was conducted with professionals (
resultsCommon barriers included unclear networks, lack of shared goals, and limited time, whereas facilitators involved strong team dynamics, clear structures, and flexibility. These findings point to five key needs: (i) adaptive team composition in response to patient care issues, (ii) shared ownership within interprofessional teams, (iii) shared meetings' aims and work agreements, (iv) a balanced structure with clear procedures, supportive tools and room for flexibility, (v) and a satisfactory perceived quality of the meetings.
conclusionThis study shows that nurturing team dynamics, tailoring organisational structures, and embedding ongoing evaluation are essential beyond patient care. This may need a new way of thinking to enhance the sustainability of interprofessional team meetings in primary care.
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.