You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
| Title |
Teamwork in Health Care: Maximizing Collective Intelligence via Inclusive Collaboration and Open Communication
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The AMA Journal of Ethic, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.9.stas2-1609 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna T Mayo, Anita Williams Woolley |
| Abstract |
Teams offer the potential to achieve more than any person could achieve working alone; yet, particularly in teams that span professional boundaries, it is critical to capitalize on the variety of knowledge, skills, and abilities available. This article reviews research from the field of organizational behavior to shed light on what makes for a collectively intelligent team. In doing so, we highlight the importance of moving beyond simply including smart people on a team to thinking about how those people can effectively coordinate and collaborate. In particular, we review the importance of two communication processes: ensuring that team members with relevant knowledge (1) speak up when one's expertise can be helpful and (2) influence the team's work so that the team does its collective best for the patient. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 27 | 39% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 10% |
| France | 4 | 6% |
| Canada | 4 | 6% |
| Slovenia | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Comoros | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 22 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 45 | 64% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 21% |
| Scientists | 8 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 161 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Researcher | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 12% |
| Unknown | 58 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 15% |
| Unknown | 60 | 37% |