The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conceptualising successful partnerships
Abstract
Partnership working has become a central feature of British social welfare policy since 1997. Although this development is applicable to all areas of public welfare, nowhere is it more evident than in the planning and provision of care that overlaps health and social services. The literature survey described in the present paper focused on research examining the impact of partnership working in these areas to assess the evidence concerning its effects and to investigate how partnership 'success' is conceptualised. The literature conceptualised the success of partnerships in two main ways: (1) process issues, such as how well the partners work together in addressing joint aims and the long-term sustainability of the partnership; and (2) outcome issues, including changes in service delivery, and subsequent effects on the health or well-being of service users. The authors found that research into partnerships has centred heavily on process issues, while much less emphasis has been given to outcome success. If social welfare policy is to be more concerned with improving service delivery and user outcomes than with the internal mechanics of administrative structures and decision-making, this is a knowledge gap that urgently needs to be filled.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy
Cooper, R. N., & Giddens, A. (1999) · Foreign Affairs · doi:10.2307/20049222 · Cited by 3,170
Elliott, M. (1989) · Elderly Care · doi:10.7748/eldc.9.2.22.s18 · Cited by 960
What works?Evidence-based policy and practice in public services
Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M., & Smith, P. C. (2000) · Policy Press eBooks · doi:10.1332/policypress/9781861341914.001.0001 · Cited by 911
Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society
Newman, J. (2001) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781446220511 · Cited by 843
New Managerialism, New Welfare?
Clarke, J., Gewirtz, S., & McLaughlin, E. (2000) · Cited by 609
Sullivan, H., & Skelcher, C. (2002) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4039-4010-0 · Cited by 586
Delivering joined–up government in the UK: dimensions, issues and problems
Ling, T. (2002) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/1467-9299.00321 · Cited by 472
The New NHS: Modern-Dependable: (561692009-001)
Blair, T. (1998) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e561692009-001 · Cited by 329
Interprofessionality in health and social care: the Achilles' heel of partnership?
Hudson, B. (2002) · Journal of Interprofessional Care · doi:10.1080/13561820220104122 · Cited by 302
Hudson, B., Hardy, B., Henwood, M., & Wistow, G. (1999) · Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory · doi:10.1080/14719039900000005 · Cited by 249
Cited by
Alderwick, H., Hutchings, A., Briggs, A., & Mays, N. (2021) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-021-10630-1 · Cited by 386
Theories of Change and Realistic Evaluation: Peas in a Pod or Apples and Oranges?
Blamey, A., & Mackenzie, M. (2007) · Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1356389007082129 · Cited by 383
Hendriks, A.-M., Jansen, M. W., Gubbels, J. S., De Vries, N. K., Paulussen, T., & Kremers, S. P. (2013) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-46 · Cited by 68
Metadata
- Authors
- Dowling, B., Powell, M., & Glendinning, C.
- Venue
- Health and Social Care in the Community
- Publisher
- Hindawi Limited
- Published
- 2004-07
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 309-317
- ISSN
- 0966-0410 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2524
- OpenAlex
- W2154608981
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 30.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conceptualising successful partnerships. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2004.00500.x
- The paper
- Dowling, B., Powell, M., & Glendinning, C. (2004). Conceptualising successful partnerships. Health and Social Care in the Community. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2004.00500.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.