↓ Skip to main content

Interprofessional Collaboration: A Qualitative Study of Non-Physician Perspectives on Resident Competency

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 Mendeley
Title
Interprofessional Collaboration: A Qualitative Study of Non-Physician Perspectives on Resident Competency
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11606-017-4238-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariposa Garth, Alexandra Millet, Emily Shearer, Sara Stafford, Sylvia Bereknyei Merrell, Janine Bruce, Erika Schillinger, Alistair Aaronson, David Svec

Abstract

The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) includes the ability to collaborate in an interprofessional team as a core professional activity that trainees should be able to complete on day 1 of residency (Med Sci Educ. 26:797-800, 2016). The training that medical students require in order to achieve this competency, however, is not well established (Med Sci Educ. 26:457-61, 2016), and few studies have examined non-physician healthcare professionals' perspectives regarding resident physicians' interprofessional skills. This study aims to describe non-physicians' views on barriers to collaboration with physicians, as well as factors that contribute to good collaborative relationships. Nurses, social workers, case managers, dietitians, rehabilitation therapists, and pharmacists at one academic medical center, largely working in the inpatient setting. A qualitative study design was employed. Data were collected from individual interviews and focus groups comprising non-physician healthcare professionals. Knowledge gaps identified as impeding interprofessional collaboration included inadequate understanding of current roles, potential roles, and processes for non-physician healthcare professionals. Specific physician behaviors that were identified as contributing to good collaborative relationships included mutual support such as backing up other team members and prioritizing multidisciplinary rounds, and communication including keeping team members informed, asking for their input, physicians explaining their rationale, and practicing joint problem-solving with non-physicians. Discussion of how physician trainees can best learn to collaborate as members of an interprofessional team must include non-physician perspectives. Training designed to provide medical students and residents with a better understanding of non-physician roles and to enhance mutual support and communication skills may be critical in achieving the AAMC's goals of making physicians effective members of interprofessional teams, and thus improving patient-centered care. We hope that medical educators will include these areas identified as important by non-physicians in targeted team training for their learners.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 33 24%
Unknown 41 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 37 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 19%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 45 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#6,289,574
of 25,364,653 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,458
of 8,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,878
of 453,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#34
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,364,653 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 453,319 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.