Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30200968›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2018

Community boundary spanners as an addition to the health workforce to reach marginalised people: a scoping review of the literature.

Carolyn Wallace, Jane Farmer, Anthony McCosker

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Diplomatic roles of regional coordinators for WHO Member States.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A virtuous cycle of co-production: Reflections from a community priority-setting exercise.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Exploring access in a volunteer free-service dental clinic.Canadian journal of dental hygiene : CJDH = Journal canadien de l'hygiene dentaire : JCHD · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Carolyn WallaceSwinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. cwallace@swin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-5687-4343
Jane FarmerSwinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia.
Anthony McCoskerSwinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth services in high-income countries increasingly recognise the challenge of effectively serving and engaging with marginalised people. Effective engagement with marginalised people is essential to reduce health disparities these populations face. One solution is by tapping into the phenomenon of boundary-spanning people in the community-those who facilitate the flow of ideas, information, activities and relationships across organisation and socio-cultural boundaries.

methodsA scoping review methodology was applied to peer-reviewed articles to answer the question: "How do health services identify, recruit and use boundary spanners and what are the outcomes?" The review was conducted in seven databases with search terms based on community-based boundary spanning, marginalised people and health services.

findingsWe identified 422 articles with the screening process resulting in a final set of 30 articles. We identified five types of community-based boundary spanning: navigators, community health workers, lay workers, peer supporters and community entities. These range from strong alignment to the organisation through to those embedded in the community. We found success in four domains for the organisation, the boundary spanner, the marginalised individuals and the broader community. Quantifiable outcomes related to cost-savings, improved disease management and high levels of clinical care. Outcomes for marginalised individuals related to improved health knowledge and behaviours, improved health, social benefits, reduced barriers to accessing services and increased participation in services. We identified potential organisational barriers to using boundary spanners based on organisational culture and staff beliefs.

conclusionsCommunity boundary spanners are a valuable adjunct to the health workforce. They enable access to hard to reach populations with beneficial health outcomes. Maintaining the balance of organisational and community alignment is key to ongoing success and diffusion of this approach.

Indexed as

Social MarginalizationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCommunity Health CentersDeveloped CountriesEthnicityFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHealth WorkforceHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrisonersTransients and MigrantsBoundary spanningCommunity health workersDeveloped countriesHealth services/utilisationMarginalisedNavigatorsPublic health

Identifiers

PMID30200968
PMCPMC6131945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.