Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Practical Recommendations for Youth Care Professionals to Improve Evaluation and Reflection During Multidisciplinary Team Discussions: An Action Research Project Cover

Practical Recommendations for Youth Care Professionals to Improve Evaluation and Reflection During Multidisciplinary Team Discussions: An Action Research Project

International Journal of Integrated Care
Volume 22 (2022): Issue 1
By: L. A. Nooteboom,  E. A. Mulder,  R. R. J. M. Vermeiren,  J. Eilander,  S. I. van den Driesschen and  C. H. Z. Kuiper  
Open Access
|Mar 2022

References

  1. 1Brooks F, Bloomfield L, Offredy M, Shaughnessy P. Evaluation of services for children with complex needs: mapping service provision in one NHS Trust. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2013; 14(1): 52–62. DOI: 10.1017/S1463423612000217
    Back to article
  2. 2Hilverdink P, Daamen W, Vink C. Children and youth support and care in the Netherlands. Available from http://www.nji.nl/nl/Download-NJi/Publicatie-NJi/Children-and-youth-support-and-care-in-The-Netherlands.pdf.
    Back to article
  3. 3Tausendfreund T, Knot-Dickscheit J, Schulze GC, Knorth EJ, Grietens H. Families in multi-problem situations: Backgrounds, characteristics, and care services. Child and Youth Services. 2016; 37(1): 4–22. DOI: 10.1080/0145935X.2015.1052133
    Back to article
  4. 4World Health Organization. Integrated Care Models: an Overview. Available from http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/Health-systems/health-services-delivery/publications/2016/integrated-care-models-an-overview-2016.
    Back to article
  5. 5Patel V, Belkin GS, Chockalingam A, Cooper J, Saxena S, Unützer J. Grand challenges: integrating mental health services into priority health care platforms. PLOS Medicine. 2013; 10(5): e1001448. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001448
    Back to article
  6. 6Cooper M, Evans Y, Pybis J. Interagency collaboration in children and young people’s mental health: a systematic review of outcomes, facilitating factors and inhibiting factors. Child: Care, Health and Development. 2016; 42(3): 325–342. DOI: 10.1111/cch.12322
    Back to article
  7. 7Janssens A, Peremans L, Deboutte D. Conceptualizing collaboration between children’s services and child and adolescent psychiatry: A bottom—up process based on a qualitative needs assessment among the professionals. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2010; 15(2): 251–266. DOI: 10.1177/1359104509340651
    Back to article
  8. 8Nancarrow SA, Booth A, Ariss S, Smith T, Enderby P, Roots A. Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work. Hum Resour Health. 2013; 11: 19. DOI: 10.1186/1478-4491-11-19
    Back to article
  9. 9Saint-Pierre C, Herskovic V, Sepúlveda M. Multidisciplinary collaboration in primary care: a systematic review. Fam Pract. 2018; 35(2): 132–141. DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmx085
    Back to article
  10. 10Golding KS. Multi-agency and specialist working to meet the mental health needs of children in care and adopted. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2010; 15(4): 573–587. DOI: 10.1177/1359104510375933
    Back to article
  11. 11Garcia A, Puckett A, Ezell M, Pecora PJ, Tanoury T, Rodriguez W. Three models of collaborative child protection: what is their influence on short stays in foster care? Child & Family Social Work. 2014; 19(2): 125–135. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2206.2012.00890.x
    Back to article
  12. 12Huxley P, Evans S, Baker C, White J, Philpin S, Onyett S, Gould N. Integration of social care staff within community mental health teams. Final Report. Southampton: NIHR Service Delivery and Organisation Programme; 2014.
    Back to article
  13. 13Nooteboom LA, van den Driesschen SI, Kuiper CHZ, Vermeiren RRJM, Mulder EA. An integrated approach to meet the needs of high-vulnerable families: a qualitative study on integrated care from a professional perspective. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health. 2020; 14(1): 18. DOI: 10.1186/s13034-020-00321-x
    Back to article
  14. 14Raine R, Xanthopoulou P, Wallace I, Nic A’ Bháird C, Lanceley A, Clarke A, Barber J, et al. Determinants of treatment plan implementation in multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with chronic diseases: a mixed-methods study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014; 23(10): 867–876. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-002818
    Back to article
  15. 15World Health Organization. Monitoring and evaluation of mental health policies and plans. Available from: https://www.who.int/mental_health/policy/services/14-monitoring%20evaluation_HKprinter.pdf.
    Back to article
  16. 16Korthagen F. Inconvenient truths about teacher learning: towards professional development 3.0. Teachers and Teaching. 2017; 23(4): 387–405. DOI: 10.1080/13540602.2016.1211523
    Back to article
  17. 17Raine R, A’ Bháird CN, Xanthopoulou P, Wallace I, Ardron D, Harris M, Livingston G, et al. Use of a formal consensus development technique to produce recommendations for improving the effectiveness of adult mental health multidisciplinary team meetings. BMC Psychiatry. 2015; 15: 143. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-015-0534-6
    Back to article
  18. 18Rosell L, Alexandersson N, Hagberg O, Nilbert M. Benefits, barriers and opinions on multidisciplinary team meetings: a survey in Swedish cancer care. BMC Health Services Research. 2018; 18(1): 249. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-2990-4
    Back to article
  19. 19Heneghan C, Wright J, Watson G. Clinical psychologists’ experiences of reflective staff groups in inpatient psychiatric settings: a mixed methods study. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy. 2014; 21(4): 324–340. DOI: 10.1002/cpp.1834
    Back to article
  20. 20Gordijn F, Eernstman N, Helder J, Brouwer H. Reflection methods: practical guide for trainers and facilitators: Tools to make learning more meaningful. Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation; 2018. DOI: 10.18174/439461
    Back to article
  21. 21Abma TA, Cook T, Rämgård M, Kleba E, Harris J, Wallerstein N. Social impact of participatory health research: collaborative non-linear processes of knowledge mobilization. Educational Action Research. 2017; 25(4): 489–505. DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2017.1329092
    Back to article
  22. 22Migchelbrink F. Actieonderzoek voor professionals in zorg en welzijn [Action research for professionals in care and welfare]. Swp, uitgeverij B.V; 2007.
    Back to article
  23. 23Nyström ME, Karltun J, Keller C, Andersson Gäre B. Collaborative and partnership research for improvement of health and social services: researcher’s experiences from 20 projects. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018; 16(1): 46. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-018-0322-0
    Back to article
  24. 24Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001; 358(9280): 483–488. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6
    Back to article
  25. 25Chen Y, Yang K, Marušic A, Qaseem A, Meerpohl JJ, Flottorp S, Norris SL, et al. A Reporting Tool for Practice Guidelines in Health Care: The RIGHT Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2017; 166(2): 128–132. DOI: 10.7326/M16-1565
    Back to article
  26. 26Tufford L, Newman P. Bracketing in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Social Work. 2010; 11(1): 80–96. DOI: 10.1177/1473325010368316
    Back to article
  27. 27Mulhall A. In the field: notes on observation in qualitative research. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2003; 41(3): 306–313. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02514.x
    Back to article
  28. 28Leavy P. The Oxford handbook of qualitative research. USA: Oxford University Press; 2014. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199811755.001.0001
    Back to article
  29. 29Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N. Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal. 2000; 320(7227): 114. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114
    Back to article
  30. 30Smith B, McGannon KR. Developing rigor in qualitative research: problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2018; 11(1): 101–121. DOI: 10.1080/1750984X.2017.1317357
    Back to article
  31. 31Femdal I, Solbjør M. Equality and differences: group interaction in mixed focus groups of users and professionals discussing power. Society, Health & Vulnerability. 2018; 9(1): 1447193. DOI: 10.1080/20021518.2018.1447193
    Back to article
  32. 32Thomas DR. Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research? Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2017; 14(1): 23–41. DOI: 10.1080/14780887.2016.1219435
    Back to article
  33. 33Bekhet AK, Zauszniewski JA. Methodological triangulation: an approach to understanding data. Nurse Res. 2012; 20(2): 40–43. DOI: 10.7748/nr2012.11.20.2.40.c9442
    Back to article
  34. 34Fixsen D, Blasé K, Metz A, Van Dyke M. Statewide implementation of evidence-based programs. Exceptional Children. 2013; 79(2): 213–230. DOI: 10.1177/0014402913079002071
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.5639 | Journal eISSN: 1568-4156
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Nov 9, 2020
Accepted on: Mar 15, 2022
Published on: Mar 30, 2022
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
evaluation,
reflection,
action research,
interprofessional collaboration,
multidisciplinary,
integrated care

© 2022 L. A. Nooteboom, E. A. Mulder, R. R. J. M. Vermeiren, J. Eilander, S. I. van den Driesschen, C. H. Z. Kuiper, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 22 (2022): Issue 1Next article