Search

The involvement of non-researcher contributors (eg, stakeholders, patients and the public, decision and policy makers, experts, lay contributors) has taken a variety of forms within evidence syntheses. Realist reviews are a form of evidence synthesis that involves non-researcher contributors yet this practice has received little attention. In particular, the role of patient and public involvement (PPI) has not been clearly documented. This review of reviews describes the ways in which contributor involvement, including PPI, is documented within healthcare realist reviews published over the last five years. A total of 448 papers published between 2014 and 2019 were screened, yielding 71 full-text papers included in this review. Statements about contributor involvement were synthesized across each review using framework analysis. Three themes are described in this article including nomenclature, nature of involvement, and reporting impact.

Background: Recent policy initiatives seeking to address the workforce crisis in general practice have promoted greater multidisciplinarity. Evidence is lacking on how changes in staffing and the relational climate in practice teams affect the experiences of staff and patients. Aim: To synthesise evidence on how the composition of the practice workforce and team climate affect staff job satisfaction and burnout, and the processes and quality of care for patients. Design & setting: A systematic literature review of international evidence. Method: Four different searches were carried out using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Evidence from English language articles from 2012-2022 was identified, with no restriction on study design. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and data were synthesised thematically. Results: In total, 11 studies in primary healthcare settings were included, 10 from US integrated healthcare systems, one from Canada. Findings indicated that when teams are understaffed and work environments are stressful, patient care and staff wellbeing suffer. However, a good relational climate can buffer against burnout and protect patient care quality in situations of high workload. Good team dynamics and stable team membership are important for patient care coordination and job satisfaction. Female physicians are at greater risk of burnout. Conclusion: Evidence regarding team composition and team climate in relation to staff and patient outcomes in general practice remains limited. Challenges exist when drawing conclusions across different team compositions and definitions of team climate. Further research is needed to explore the conditions that generate a 'good' climate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: General practice is in a state of crisis in a number of countries. In the UK, a range of measures have been introduced to address the situation, including innovations such as practice networks, multidisciplinary roles, and digital technologies. However, identifying what still needs fixing could benefit from more evidence, particularly in relation to day-to-day service delivery. Aim: To identify the general practice workforce's top 10 research priorities to improve service delivery. Design and setting: This priority-setting study used an adapted James Lind Alliance methodology and involved staff working in general practice across the UK. Method: The study comprised four phases: an online qualitative survey issued to the general practice workforce (clinical and non-clinical groups); thematic analysis of free-text responses; generation of indicative research questions; and the undertaking of ranking exercises with responders of the original survey. An online workshop was held with participants at the final stage of prioritisation. Results: In total, 93 staff completed a survey in Phase 1, from which 20 themes were categorised and developed into research questions. Twenty- two staff responded to the first ranking activity and 11 took part in a second ranking activity to discuss themes that had a tied vote. The final top 10 research priorities were: volume of work; patient behaviour; consultations; employment pay and conditions; workload dumping and care of patients on waiting list; funding; overwhelming pressure; patient health education; complex patient needs; and interfaces with secondary care. However, there was no clear ranking of these 10 priorities; instead, they carried equal weight and were closely interconnected. Conclusion: Applying a marginal-gains approach, by seeking to explore all 10 priorities simultaneously as opposed to concentrating on one area at a time, may provide more noticeable improvements overall. Systems-based approaches that take account of the marked role that context has may be a particularly useful lens for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dementia care is a key priority for both NHS England and the UK government. National guidelines highlight the importance of care coordination to address the challenges people living with dementia and their carers can encounter when trying to access the health and care system. To counter these challenges, Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board (ICB) have recently implemented a proactive dementia care coordinator (DCC) service to support people with dementia and their carers from pre-diagnosis to end-of-life care. Aim: To understand how the DCC service works (or does not work), for whom, and in what circumstances. The findings will inform service development and future investment decisions. Design & setting: This study will use a realist approach to evaluate the DCC service in Kent and Medway ICB, south-east England, which has a population of 1.9 million, comprising 42 primary care networks (PCNs; groups of general practices) each having a DCC. Method: An initial programme theory will be developed from existing literature, and in collaboration with stakeholders. Mixed methods, including questionnaires to DCCs, service provider metrics, and qualitative interviews, will be used to collect data on service provider and service user experiences. Interpretive comparative analysis and narrative synthesis, including evaluation of service costs against outcomes, will produce a refined final programme theory. Results: The results from this project will produce evidence-based recommendations to help improve service delivery and possible service expansion. Conclusion: This protocol describes a realist evaluation designed to investigate the recently implemented DCC service in Kent and Medway ICB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this editorial, we tell the story of how the Special Issue on Critical Perspectives in Work and Organizational Psychology (CWOP) came about, how it fits within the broader agenda of building a critical community within Work and Organizational Psychology, and how future research and thought may be inspired by the collection of critical papers related to work and organizational psychology. We introduce the term "criticalizing" as a key concept in how the Special Issue was developed by the editorial team and the authors. Criticalizing moves beyond fixed static notions of "critical" scholarship toward a process of engaging in more fluid, expansive, and creative perspectives on the scholarship within work and organizational psychology. We illustrate how the set of papers within the Special Issue engages in such criticalizing of the field and offer new ways of thinking about and researching relevant topics in work and organizational psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hash Diner, Shira Kohn, & Rachel Kranson, eds., A JEWISH FEMININE MYSTIQUE? JEWISH WOMEN IN POSTWAR AMERICA. New Brunswick, NJ: Rurgers University Press, 2010. 284p. index, pap., $25.95, ISBN 978-0813547923. [...]