Abstract
Diagnostics using next generation sequencing (NGS) requires high-quality interdisciplinary collaboration. In order to gain insight into this crucial collaborative process, we made video recordings of a new multidisciplinary team at work in the clinical genetics department of the University Medical Centre Groningen. Conversation Analysis was used to investigate the ways in which the team members deal with the disciplinary boundaries between them. We found that the team established different ‘participation frames’ in which to discuss recurring topics. Patients were discussed only by the medical doctors, whereas results of genetic tests were discussed by doctors, molecular biologists and genetic laboratory technicians. Information technology (IT) aspects were discussed by biologists, genetics analysts and bio-informaticians, but not doctors. We then interviewed team members who said they believed that the division of labour embodied in these participation frames contributes to achieving their team’s goals.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Bokhour BG : Communication in interdisciplinary team meetings: what are we talking about? J Interprof Care 2006; 20: 349–363.
Youngwerth J, Twaddle M : Cultures of interdisciplinary teams: how to foster good dynamics. J Palliat Med 2011; 14: 650–654.
Allen JA, Lehmann-Willenbrock N, Rogelberg SG (eds): The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
Sims S, Hewitt G, Harris R : Evidence of collaboration, pooling of resources, learning and role blurring in interprofessional healthcare teams: a realist synthesis. J Interprof Care 2015; 29: 20–25.
Nancarrow SA, Smith T, Ariss S, Enderby PM : Qualitative evaluation of the implementation of the interdisciplinary management tool: a reflective tool to enhance interdisciplinary teamwork using structured, facilitated action research for implementation. Health Social Care Community 2015; 23: 437–448.
Thompson JL : Building collective communication competence in interdisciplinary research teams. J Appl Commun Res 2009; 37: 278–297.
Raclaw J, Ford CE : Meetings as interactional achievements. a conversation analytic perspective; in Allen JA, Lehmann-Willenbrock N, Rogelberg SG (eds): The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2015, pp 247–276.
Goffman E : Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston, MA, USA: Northeastern University Press, 1974.
Goffman E : Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1981.
Asmuß B : Multimodal perspectives on meeting interaction: recent trends in conversation analysis; in Allen JA, Lehmann-Willenbrock N, Rogelberg SG (eds): The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2015, pp 277–304.
Goodwin C : The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation; in Psathas G (ed): Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York, NY, USA: Irvington Publishers, 1979, pp 97–121.
Goodwin C : Conversational Organization: Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York, NY, USA: Academic Press, 1981.
Goodwin C : Notes on story structure and the organization of participation; in Atkinson JM, Heritage J (eds). Structures of social action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1984, pp 225–246.
Jefferson G : Transcript notation; in Atkinson JM, Heritage J (eds). Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1984, pp ix–xvi.
Sidnell J, Stivers T (eds): The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.
Levinson S : Action formation and ascription; in Sidnell J, Stivers T (eds). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013, pp 103–130.
Sacks H, Schegloff E, Jefferson G : A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 1974; 50: 696–735.
Huiskes M : The role of the clause for turn-taking in Dutch conversations. Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT, 2010.
Schegloff EA : Sequence Organization in Interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
ten Have P : Doing Conversation Analysis. A Practical Guide. London, UK: Sage, 1999.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koole, T., van Burgsteden, L., Harms, P. et al. Participation in interdisciplinary meetings on genetic diagnostics (NGS). Eur J Hum Genet 25, 1099–1105 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2017.111
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2017.111
This article is cited by
-
Clinical Oncogenomics and Personalized Medicine in Colorectal Cancer for the Surgeon: What We Need to Know and What the Future Holds
SN Comprehensive Clinical Medicine (2022)
