ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Factors Influencing Perceived Multidisciplinary Team Meeting Effectiveness in Teams Addressing Work-Related Respiratory Diseases: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multidisciplinary teamwork is crucial for addressing complex health issues, including work-related respiratory diseases. In this context, perceived effectiveness of the multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) is critical to team viability and functioning. However, research on what makes members of multidisciplinary teams addressing work-related diseases perceive their MDTM as effective is still lacking in the literature. Therefore, for these teams, this study explored team-level and team-member-level factors perceived to shape MDTM effectiveness, and clarifies how these factors manifest across MDTM-phases. Methods: A qualitative study combining semi-structured interviews and MDTM-observations was conducted. Participants were members of Dutch multidisciplinary teams addressing work-related respiratory diseases. Interviews focused on team functioning (team factors) and individual team member characteristics (team member factors). Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis and organized across MDTM-phases identified through observations. Results: Eight MDTM team members were interviewed and two team meetings were observed. Twelve themes perceived to influence MDTM-effectiveness were identified. For the pre-MDTM phase, team preparation, social safety and openness, and guided online participation (team factors), and anticipated benefits of participating in the MDTM (team member factor), were preconditions for perceived team effectiveness. For the patient discussion phase, patient case accuracy, expertise, constructive information flow, guidance for inclusion, and decision clarity (team factors), and respect (team member factor), were found important factors for perceived team effectiveness. For the post-MDTM phase, team reflections on positive MDTM output (team factor) and individual team member reflections on benefits of participation in the MDTM (team member factor) were perceived to motivate and therefore to contribute to MDTM-effectiveness. Conclusion: Team-level factors, and team-member-level factors, perceived to influence MDTM -effectiveness in multidisciplinary teams addressing work-related respiratory diseases have successfully been retrieved and identified. The findings suggest that both team organization and individual team member features contribute to how MDTMs are experienced and valued, and the study insights present multidisciplinary teams addressing work-related respiratory diseases insights and ways for optimizing their MDTM- practices.
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.