Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of collaborations

From: Collaboration between biomedical research and community-based primary health care actors in chronic disease management: a scoping review

Variables

Number (n)

Percentage (%)

Level of the collaboration (n = 20)

 International

9

45

 Federal

4

20

 Provincial

4

20

 Local

1

5

 Missing

2

10

Year of implementation (n = 20)

 2010

4

20

 2011

3

15

 2014

2

10

 2012

1

5

 2009

1

5

 2008

1

5

 2002

1

5

 1999

1

5

 1998

1

5

 1967

1

5

 Missing

4

20

Funding sources (n = 20)

 Public and Private

11

55

 Public

3

15

 Missing

6

30

Structure**** (n = 20)

 Network structure

7

35

 Hierarchical structure

6

30

 Divisional structure

3

15

 Team-based organizational Structure

3

15

 Missing

1

5

Location (n = 20)

 Physical and Virtual sites

10

50

 Physical site

3

15

 Virtual site

2

10

 Missing

5

25

Clinical focus (n = 20)

 Cardiovascular diseases

5

25

 Mixed**

4

20

 Cancer

3

75

 Cardiovascular diseases

3

75

 Brain glioma

1

25

 Chronic metabolic diseases

1

25

 Diabetes

1

25

 Endocrine and metabolic diseases

1

25

 Gerontology

1

25

 Hemopoietic disease

1

25

 HIV/AIDS

1

25

 Inflammatory diseases

1

25

 Kidney disease

1

25

 Obesity

1

25

 Neuropsychological disease

1

25

 Psychosomatic diseases

1

25

 Reproductive health

1

25

 Trauma

1

25

 Visual reconstruction

1

25

 Cardiovascular disease complications

1

5

 Diabetes

1

5

 Diabetes complications

1

5

 Gerontology

1

5

 Neurological diseases

1

5

 Brain diseases

1

5

 Missing

5

25

Goal (n = 20)

 Mixed**

19

95

 To improve biomedical research

17

89

 To promote collaborative practices

14

74

 To promote the translation between research and clinical practice

14

74

 To support patient treatment

11

58

 To improve clinical practices

8

42

 To help prevent diseases

6

32

 To ensure equitable benefit from scientific evidence

1

5

 To promote collaborative practices

1

5

Type of interaction between the people involved (n = 20)

 Mixed**

18

90

 Collaboration

18

100

 Partnership

18

100

 Information

7

39

 Consultation

4

22

 Collaboration

1

5

 Missing

1

5

Governance (n = 20)*****

 Central governance

9

45

 Multi-level governance

2

10

 Public governance

1

5

 Missing

8

40

  1. **Non-mutually exclusive categories (Each category was coded yes/no; The fraction was calculated as follows: the value of each category is divided by the total number of the mixed category)
  2. ****Hierarchical structure: This structure looks like a pyramid: each level is in charge of the levels below and reports to the levels above (also referred to traditional structure).: In this structure, employees are grouped, with every employee having one clear supervisor. / Network Structure: Connected together by informal networks and the demands of the task, rather than a formal organizational structure. The network organization prioritizes its “soft structure” of relationships, networks, teams, groups and communities rather than reporting lines. / Divisional Structure: Organization is split up into semi-autonomous units called divisions. While the divisions have control over their day-to-day operations, they still are answerable to a central authority that provides the overall strategy for the organization and coordinates its implementation among the divisions. / Team-based Organizational Structure: Groups employees who perform specific duties into project teams that perform specific functions
  3. *****Multi-level governance: There is a dispersion of authority between levels of collaboration / Central governance: An authority governs entire collaboration / Public governance: Refers to the evolving role of the State (government sector)
Back to article page

Translational Medicine Communications

ISSN: 2396-832X

Contact us