Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33051285›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2020

Community engagement for COVID-19 prevention and control: a rapid evidence synthesis.

Brynne Gilmore, Rawlance Ndejjo, Adalbert Tchetchia, Vergil de Claro, Elizabeth Mago, Alpha A Diallo, Claudia Lopes, Sanghita Bhattacharyya

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 224 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
224citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

224 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 449 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Digital behaviour change interventions to increase vegetable intake in adults: a systematic review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

164 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.

Brynne GilmoreUCD Centre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems (UCD IRIS), School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland brynne.gilmore@ucd.ie.ORCID 0000-0003-4496-9254
Rawlance NdejjoDepartment of Disease Control and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Adalbert TchetchiaExpanded Programme on Immunization, Ministry of Health, Yaoundé, Cameroon.
Vergil de ClaroRTI International, Pasig City, Philippines.
Elizabeth MagoHeller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA.
Alpha A DialloRépublique de Guinée Ministère de Santé, Conakry, Guinea.
Claudia LopesUnited Nations University International Institute for Global Health, Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Sanghita BhattacharyyaPublic Health Foundation of India, Haryana, India.
Brandeis University · USMakerere University · UGMinistry of Public Health · CMUnited Nations Children's Fund · USUnited Nations University-International Institute for Global Health · MYUniversity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCommunity engagement has been considered a fundamental component of past outbreaks, such as Ebola. However, there is concern over the lack of involvement of communities and 'bottom-up' approaches used within COVID-19 responses thus far. Identifying how community engagement approaches have been used in past epidemics may support more robust implementation within the COVID-19 response. METHODOLOGY: A rapid evidence review was conducted to identify how community engagement is used for infectious disease prevention and control during epidemics. Three databases were searched in addition to extensive snowballing for grey literature. Previous epidemics were limited to Ebola, Zika, SARS, Middle East respiratory syndromeand H1N1 since 2000. No restrictions were applied to study design or language.

resultsFrom 1112 references identified, 32 articles met our inclusion criteria, which detail 37 initiatives. Six main community engagement actors were identified: local leaders, community and faith-based organisations, community groups, health facility committees, individuals and key stakeholders. These worked on different functions: designing and planning, community entry and trust building, social and behaviour change communication, risk communication, surveillance and tracing, and logistics and administration.

conclusionCOVID-19's global presence and social transmission pathways require social and community responses. This may be particularly important to reach marginalised populations and to support equity-informed responses. Aligning previous community engagement experience with current COVID-19 community-based strategy recommendations highlights how communities can play important and active roles in prevention and control. Countries worldwide are encouraged to assess existing community engagement structures and use community engagement approaches to support contextually specific, acceptable and appropriate COVID-19 prevention and control measures.

Indexed as

Communicable Disease ControlCommunity ParticipationBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19HumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2diseasesdisordersinfectionsinjuriesprevention strategiespublic healthreview

Identifiers

PMID33051285
PMCPMC7554411
OpenAlexW3092393555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.