Physicians' professional identities: a roadmap to understanding “value” in cardiovascular imaging

Keller, Eric J.; Vogelzang, Robert L.; Freed, Benjamin H.; Carr, James C.; Collins, Jeremy D.

doi:10.1186/s12968-016-0274-x

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Physicians underwent similarly intense socialization processes based largely on individual success to become autonomous experts. They also adopted distinct specialty cultures [13] that were often most central to their sense of professional identity, i.e., they perceived themselves more as cardiologists or vascular surgeons than [organization] physicians and achieved success through their legacy as researchers, educators, and/or innovators within their specialty. This seemed particularly true for academic physicians, and so recognition of and support for their activities beyond patient care was imperative for their engagement.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The growing pains of physician-administration relationships in an academic medical center and the effects on physician engagement

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Physician engagement has become a key metric for healthcare leadership and is associated with better healthcare outcomes. However, engagement tends to be low and difficult to measure and improve. This study sought to efficiently characterize the professional cultural dynamics between physicians and administrators at an academic hospital and how those dynamics affect physician engagement. Materials and methods A qualitative mixed methods analysis was completed in 6 weeks, consisting of a preliminary analysis of the hospital system’s history that was used to purposefully recruit 20 physicians across specialties and 20 healthcare administrators across management levels for semi-structured interviews and observation. Participation rates of 77% (20/26) and 83% (20/24) were achieved for physicians and administrators, respectively. Cohorts consisted of equal numbers of men and women with experience ranging from 1 to 35 years within the organization. Field notes and transcripts were systematically analyzed using an iterative inductive-deductive approach. Emergent themes were presented and discussed with approximately 400 physicians and administrators within the organization to assess validity and which results were most meaningful. Results & discussion This investigation indicated a professional cultural disconnect was undermining efforts to improve physician engagement. This disconnect was further complicated by a minority (10%) not believing an issue existed and conflicting connotations not readily perceived by participants who often offered similar solutions. Physicians and administrators felt these results accurately reflected their realities and used this information as a common language to plan targeted interventions to improve physician engagement. Limitations of the study included its cross-sectional nature with a modest sample size at a single institution. Conclusions A qualitative mixed methods analysis efficiently identified professional cultural barriers within an academic hospital to serve as an institution-specific guide to improving physician engagement.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The growing pains of physician-administration relationships in an academic medical center and the effects on physician engagement

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 17 , 18 The unique cultures of specialties and characteristics of medical specialists can cause miscommunication and tension that inhibits interphysician collaboration. 19 Physicians should therefore not be treated as a homogeneous group but as a diverse one that faces their own obstacles and challenges in collaboration. These challenges deserve attention, especially as interphysician collaboration becomes more important in the complex setting of hospital care.…”

Section: Interphysician Collaboration In Hospitals: a Systematic Revi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboration Between Physicians from Different Medical Specialties in Hospital Settings: A Systematic Review

Braam¹,

Buljac-Samardžić²,

Hilders³

et al. 2022

JMDH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health care today is characterized by an increasing number of patients with comorbidities for whom interphysician collaboration seems very important. We reviewed the literature to understand what factors affect interphysician collaboration, determine how interphysician collaboration is measured, and determine its effects. We systematically searched six major databases. Based on 63 articles, we identified five categories that influence interphysician collaboration: personal factors, professional factors, preconditions and tools, organizational elements, and contextual characteristics. We identified a diverse set of mostly unvalidated tools for measuring interphysician collaboration that focus on information being transferred and understood, frequency of interaction and tone of the relationship, and value judgements about quality or satisfaction. We found that interphysician collaboration increased clinical outcomes as well as patient and staff satisfaction, while error rates and length of stay were reduced. The results should, however, be interpreted with caution, as most of the studies provide a low level of evidence.

show abstract

“…Quality improvement efforts have been challenged by limited adoption of initiatives and policies. In this study, Keller and co-workers [ 201 ] interviewed 15 Northwestern Medicine physicians from internal medicine, cardiology, emergency medicine, cardiac/vascular surgery, and radiology disciplines. Differences in perceived cardiovascular imaging value and guideline use were explained by three value associated categories (managers; diagnosticians; and fixers) that were further differentiated along three axes (broad v. focused-thinkers; complex v. definitive-answer seekers; and public visibility).…”

Section: Miscellaneous Topics/reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) 2015-2016 and transition of the JCMR office to Boston

Manning

2016

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) is the official publication of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR). In 2016, the JCMR published 93 manuscripts, including 80 research papers, 6 reviews, 5 technical notes, 1 protocol, and 1 case report. The number of manuscripts published was similar to 2015 though with a 12% increase in manuscript submissions to an all-time high of 369. This reflects a decrease in the overall acceptance rate to <25% (excluding solicited reviews). The quality of submissions to JCMR continues to be high. The 2016 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2016 by Thomson Reuters) was steady at 5.601 (vs. 5.71 for 2015; as published in June 2016), which is the second highest impact factor ever recorded for JCMR. The 2016 impact factor means that the JCMR papers that were published in 2014 and 2015 were on-average cited 5.71 times in 2016.In accordance with Open-Access publishing of Biomed Central, the JCMR articles are published on-line in the order that they are accepted with no collating of the articles into sections or special thematic issues. For this reason, over the years, the Editors have felt that it is useful to annually summarize the publications into broad areas of interest or themes, so that readers can view areas of interest in a single article in relation to each other and other recent JCMR articles. The papers are presented in broad themes with previously published JCMR papers to guide continuity of thought in the journal. In addition, I have elected to open this publication with information for the readership regarding the transition of the JCMR editorial office to the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston and the editorial process.Though there is an author publication charge (APC) associated with open-access to cover the publisher’s expenses, this format provides a much wider distribution/availability of the author’s work and greater manuscript citation. For SCMR members, there is a substantial discount in the APC. I hope that you will continue to send your high quality manuscripts to JCMR for consideration. Importantly, I also ask that you consider referencing recent JCMR publications in your submissions to the JCMR and elsewhere as these contribute to our impact factor. I also thank our dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, and reviewers for their many efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner and that the JCMR continues to be recognized as the leading publication in our field.

show abstract

Physicians' professional identities: a roadmap to understanding “value” in cardiovascular imaging

Cited by 11 publications

References 25 publications

The growing pains of physician-administration relationships in an academic medical center and the effects on physician engagement

The growing pains of physician-administration relationships in an academic medical center and the effects on physician engagement

Collaboration Between Physicians from Different Medical Specialties in Hospital Settings: A Systematic Review

Review of Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) 2015-2016 and transition of the JCMR office to Boston

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About