Background Inter-organisational collaboration is increasingly prominent within contemporary healthcare systems. A range of collaboration types such as alliances, networks, and mergers have been proposed as a means to turnaround organisations, by reducing duplication of effort, enabling resource sharing, and promoting innovations. However, in practice, due to the complexity of the process, such efforts are often rife with difficulty. Notable contributions have sought to make sense of this area; however, further understanding is needed in order to gain a better understanding of why some inter-organisational collaborations work when others do not, to be able to more effectively implement collaborations in the future. Methods Realist review methodology was used with the intention of formulating context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) to explain how inter-organisational collaborations work and why, combining systematic and purposive literature search techniques. The systematic review encompassed searches for reviews, commentaries, opinion pieces, and case studies on HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Social Policy and Practice databases, and further searches were conducted using Google Scholar. Data were extracted from included studies according to relevance to the realist review. Results Fifty-three papers were included, informing the development of programme theories of how, why, and when inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work. Formulation of our programme theories incorporated the concepts of partnership synergy and collaborative inertia and found that it was essential to consider mechanisms underlying partnership functioning, such as building trust and faith in the collaboration to maximise synergy and thus collaborative performance. More integrative or mandated collaboration may lean more heavily on contract to drive collaborative behaviour. Conclusion As the first realist review of inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare as an intervention for improvement, this review provides actionable evidence for policymakers and implementers, enhancing understanding of mechanisms underlying the functioning and performing of inter-organisational collaborations, as well as how to configure the context to aid success. Next steps in this research will test the results against further case studies and primary data to produce a further refined theory. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019149009

Sedentary behavior has been found to be associated with negative health outcomes independently of physical activity in older adults. This systematic review collates interventions to reduce sedentary behavior in non-working older adults, assessing whether they are effective, feasible, and safe. A systematic search identified 2560 studies across five databases. Studies were included where participants were ≥60 years on average with none younger than 45, and participants did not work >2 days per week. A total of six studies were identified, three of which included control groups, while the other three were repeated-measures pre-post designs. Only one study randomised participants. The overall level of quality of included studies was poor. A narrative synthesis was conducted, as the level of heterogeneity in outcomes and outcome reporting were too high for a meta-analysis to be performed. The narrative synthesis suggested that interventions have the potential to reduce sitting time in non-working older adults. Included studies reported feasible and safe implementations of their interventions in most samples, except for one subsample from a study of people in sheltered housing. Objectively measured reductions in sitting time were between 3.2% and 5.3% of waking time, or up to 53.9 min per day. Future studies should employ more rigorous designs to assess the effects of reducing sedentary behavior on health and physical function, and should include follow-ups to measure the duration of behavior change.

Ethnic minorities have a high prevalence of non-communicable diseases relating to unhealthy lifestyle practices. Several factors have been identified as influencing unhealthy lifestyle practices among this population; however, there is little evidence about how these factors differ among a heterogeneous sample living in a super-diverse city. This study aimed to: (1) identify and compare factors influencing eating behaviours and physical function among ethnic older minorities living in Birmingham, United Kingdom; and (2) understand how these factors and their association with healthy eating and physical function changed over 8-months. An in-depth interviewing approach was used at baseline (n = 92) and after 8-months (n = 81). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using directed content analysis. Healthy eating was viewed as more important than, and unrelated to, physical function. Personal, social and cultural/environmental factors were identified as the main factors influencing eating behaviours and physical function, which differed by ethnicity, age, and sex. At 8-month interviews, more men than women reported adverse changes. The study provides unique and useful insights regarding perceived eating behaviours and physical function in a relatively large and diverse sample of older adults that can be used to design new, and adapt existing, culturally-tailored community interventions to support healthy ageing.

Background Health systems are facing unprecedented socioeconomic pressures as well as the need to cope with the ongoing strain brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, the reconfiguration of health systems to encourage greater collaboration and integration has been promoted with a variety of collaborative shapes and forms being encouraged and developed. Despite this continued interest, evidence for success of these various arrangements is lacking, with the links between collaboration and improved performance often remaining uncertain. To date, many examinations of collaborations have been undertaken, but use of realist methodology may shed additional light on how and why collaboration works, and whom it benefits. Methods This paper seeks to test initial context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) of interorganisational collaboration with the view to producing a refined realist theory. This phase of the realist synthesis used case study and evaluation literature; combined with supplementary systematic searches. These searches were screened for rigour and relevance, after which CMOCs were extracted from included literature and compared against existing ones for refinement, refutation, or affirmation. We also identified demi-regularities to better explain how these CMOCs were interlinked. Results Fifty-one papers were included, from which 338 CMOCs were identified, where many were analogous. This resulted in new mechanisms such as ‘risk threshold’ and refinement of many others, including trust, confidence, and faith, into more well-defined constructs. Refinement and addition of CMOCs enabled the creation of a ‘web of causality’ depicting how contextual factors form CMOC chains which generate outputs of collaborative behaviour. Core characteristics of collaborations, such as whether they were mandated or cross-sector, were explored for their proposed impact according to the theory. Conclusion The formulation of this refined realist theory allows for greater understanding of how and why collaborations work and can serve to inform both future work in this area and the implementation of these arrangements. Future work should delve deeper into collaborative subtypes and the underlying drivers of collaborative performance. Review registration This review is part of a larger realist synthesis, registered at PROSPERO with ID CRD42019149009.

Objectives Objectives: Human biologists are increasingly interested in measuring and comparing physical activities in different societies. Sedentary behavior, which refers to time spent sitting or lying down while awake, is a large component of daily 24 hours movement patterns in humans and has been linked to poor health outcomes such as risk of all‐cause and cardiovascular mortality, independently of physical activity. As such, it is important for researchers, with the aim of measuring human movement patterns, to most effectively use resources available to them to capture sedentary behavior. Methods This toolkit outlines objective (device‐based) and subjective (self‐report) methods for measuring sedentary behavior in free‐living contexts, the benefits and drawbacks to each, as well as novel options for combined use to maximize scientific rigor. Throughout this toolkit, emphasis is placed on considerations for the use of these methods in various field conditions and in varying cultural contexts. Results Objective measures such as inclinometers are the gold‐standard for measuring total sedentary time but they typically cannot capture contextual information or determine which specific behaviors are taking place. Subjective measures such as questionnaires and 24 hours‐recall methods can provide measurements of time spent in specific sedentary behaviors but are subject to measurement error and response bias. Conclusions We recommend that researchers use the method(s) that suit the research question; inclinometers are recommended for the measurement of total sedentary time, while self‐report methods are recommended for measuring time spent in particular contexts of sedentary behavior.