A scoping review of approaches for measuring 'interdependent' collaborative performances.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	A scoping review of approaches for measuring 'interdependent' collaborative performances.
Authors:	Sebok‐Syer, Stefanie S., Shaw, Jennifer M., Asghar, Farah, Panza, Michael, Syer, Mark D., Lingard, Lorelei
Source:	Medical Education. Oct2021, Vol. 55 Issue 10, p1123-1130. 8p. 1 Diagram.
Subjects:	CINAHL database, Psychology information storage & retrieval systems, Systematic reviews, Interprofessional relations, MEDLINE, Medical education, ERIC (Information retrieval system)
Abstract:	Introduction: Individual assessment disregards the team aspect of clinical work. Team assessment collapses the individual into the group. Neither is sufficient for medical education, where measures need to attend to the individual while also accounting for interactions with others. Valid and reliable measures of interdependence are critical within medical education given the collaborative manner in which patient care is provided. Medical education currently lacks a consistent approach to measuring the performance between individuals working together as part of larger healthcare team. This review's objective was to identify existing approaches to measuring this interdependence. Methods: Following Arksey & O'Malley's methodology, we conducted a scoping review in 2018 and updated it to 2020. A search strategy involving five databases located >12 000 citations. At least two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, screened full texts (n = 161) and performed data extraction on twenty‐seven included articles. Interviews were also conducted with key informants to check if any literature was missing and assess that our interpretations made sense. Results: Eighteen of the twenty‐seven articles were empirical; nine conceptual with an empirical illustration. Eighteen were quantitative; nine used mixed methods. The articles spanned five disciplines and various application contexts, from online learning to sports performance. Only two of the included articles were from the field of Medical Education. The articles conceptualised interdependence of a group, using theoretical constructs such as collaboration synergy; of a network, using constructs such as degree centrality; and of a dyad, using constructs such as synchrony. Both descriptive (eg social network analysis) and inferential (eg multi‐level modelling) approaches were described. Conclusion: Efforts to measure interdependence are scarce and scattered across disciplines. Multiple theoretical concepts and inconsistent terminology may be limiting programmatic work. This review motivates the need for further study of measurement techniques, particularly those combining multiple approaches, to capture interdependence in medical education. Noting the insufficiency of both individual and team assessments as means of attending to interactions between care providers, the authors review scattered efforts to measure interdependence and highlight the need for new measurement techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection

Description
Abstract:	Introduction: Individual assessment disregards the team aspect of clinical work. Team assessment collapses the individual into the group. Neither is sufficient for medical education, where measures need to attend to the individual while also accounting for interactions with others. Valid and reliable measures of interdependence are critical within medical education given the collaborative manner in which patient care is provided. Medical education currently lacks a consistent approach to measuring the performance between individuals working together as part of larger healthcare team. This review's objective was to identify existing approaches to measuring this interdependence. Methods: Following Arksey & O'Malley's methodology, we conducted a scoping review in 2018 and updated it to 2020. A search strategy involving five databases located >12 000 citations. At least two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, screened full texts (n = 161) and performed data extraction on twenty‐seven included articles. Interviews were also conducted with key informants to check if any literature was missing and assess that our interpretations made sense. Results: Eighteen of the twenty‐seven articles were empirical; nine conceptual with an empirical illustration. Eighteen were quantitative; nine used mixed methods. The articles spanned five disciplines and various application contexts, from online learning to sports performance. Only two of the included articles were from the field of Medical Education. The articles conceptualised interdependence of a group, using theoretical constructs such as collaboration synergy; of a network, using constructs such as degree centrality; and of a dyad, using constructs such as synchrony. Both descriptive (eg social network analysis) and inferential (eg multi‐level modelling) approaches were described. Conclusion: Efforts to measure interdependence are scarce and scattered across disciplines. Multiple theoretical concepts and inconsistent terminology may be limiting programmatic work. This review motivates the need for further study of measurement techniques, particularly those combining multiple approaches, to capture interdependence in medical education. Noting the insufficiency of both individual and team assessments as means of attending to interactions between care providers, the authors review scattered efforts to measure interdependence and highlight the need for new measurement techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	03080110
DOI:	10.1111/medu.14531