The conceptual basis for interprofessional collaboration: Core concepts and theoretical frameworks
Abstract
Interprofessional collaboration is a key factor in initiatives designed to increase the effectiveness of health services currently offered to the public. It is important that the concept of collaboration be well understood, because although the increasingly complex health problems faced by health professionals are creating more interdependencies among them, we still have limited knowledge of the complexity of interprofessional relationships. The goal of this literature review was to identify conceptual frameworks that could improve our understanding of this important aspect of health organizations. To this end, we have identified and taken into consideration: (A) the various definitions proposed in the literature and the various concepts associated with collaboration, and (B) the various theoretical frameworks of collaboration. Our results demonstrate that: (1) the concept of collaboration is commonly defined through five underlying concepts: sharing, partnership, power, interdependency and process; (2) the most complete models of collaboration seem to be those based on a strong theoretical background, either in organizational theory or in organizational sociology and on empirical data; (3) there is a significant amount of diversity in the way the various authors conceptualized collaboration and in the factors influencing collaboration; (4) these frameworks do not establish clear links between the elements in the models and the outputs; and (5) the literature does not provide a serious attempt to determine how patients could be integrated into the health care team, despite the fact that patients are recognized as the ultimate justification for providing collaborative care.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The identified studies did not address the role of patients in decision-making as part of the collaborative team.
“The identified studies did not address the role of patients in decision-making as part of the collaborative team as has been suggested elsewhere [19, 58].”
From ‘Gearing Up’ to improve interprofessional collaboration in primary care: a systematic review and conceptual framework (2016) · cites this paper as [58]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Teamwork in healthcare: Key discoveries enabling safer, high-quality care.
Rosen, M. A., DiazGranados, D., Dietz, A. S., Benishek, L. E., Thompson, D., Pronovost, P. J., & Weaver, S. J. (2018) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/amp0000298 · Cited by 1,283 · see citing works
Légaré, F., Stacey, D., Pouliot, S., Gauvin, F.-P., Desroches, S., Kryworuchko, J., Dunn, S., Elwyn, G., Frosch, D., Gagnon, M.-P., et al. (2011) · Journal of Interprofessional Care · doi:10.3109/13561820.2010.490502 · Cited by 357 · see citing works
Mulvale, G., Embrett, M., & Razavi, S. D. (2016) · BMC Family Practice · doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0492-1 · Cited by 253 · see citing works
Palinkas, L. A., Fuentes, D., Finno, M., Garcia, A. R., Holloway, I. W., & Chamberlain, P. (2014) · Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research · doi:10.1007/s10488-012-0437-5 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Dementia care frameworks and assistive technologies for their implementation: a review
Koumakis, L., Chatzaki, C., Kazantzaki, E., Maniadi, E., & Tsiknakis, M. (2019) · IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/rbme.2019.2892614 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Légaré, F., Brière, N., Stacey, D., Bourassa, H., Desroches, S., Dumont, S., Fraser, K., Freitas, A., Rivest, L., & Roy, L. (2015) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0567-7 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Barimani, M., & Hylander, I. (2012) · International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being · doi:10.3402/qhw.v7i0.18183 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Assessing the Effectiveness of Integrated Interventions: Terminology and Approach
Smith, G., & Clarke, D. (2006) · Medical Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.mcna.2006.04.006 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Dawson, A., Brodie, P., Copeland, F., Rumsey, M., & Homer, C. (2014) · Midwifery · doi:10.1016/j.midw.2013.05.009 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Isaacs, S., Valaitis, R., Newbold, K. B., Black, M., & Sargeant, J. (2013) · Primary Health Care Research & Development · doi:10.1017/s1463423612000254 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Interprofessional collaboration in palliative dementia care through the eyes of informal caregivers
Khemai, C., Meijers, J. M., Mujezinovic, I., Bolt, S. R., Pieters, S., Moser, A., Schols, J. M. G. A., & Janssen, D. J. A. (2022) · Dementia · doi:10.1177/14713012221098259 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
- Authors
- D'Amour, D., Ferrada-Videla, M., San Martin Rodriguez, L., & Beaulieu, M.-D.
- Affiliations
- Université de Montréal (CA)
- Venue
- Journal of Interprofessional Care
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- sup1
- Pages
- 116-131
- ISSN
- 1356-1820 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-9567
- OpenAlex
- W2167100077
- Cited by
- 1,456
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 62 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 93 · 2023: 97 · 2022: 91 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 105 · 2019: 87 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 98 · 2016: 84 · 2015: 83 · 2014: 78 · 2013: 77 · 2012: 63
- FWCI
- 38.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Interprofessional Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Keywords
- interprofessional collaboration, conceptual framework, partnership, interdependence, power, organizational theory, sociology of organizations, healthcare teams, patient integration, interprofessional relations
- MeSH terms
- Canada, Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Models, Theoretical, Patient Care Team, Patient-Centered Care
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review