Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35762841›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2022

Community engagement in health systems interventions and research in conflict-affected countries: a scoping review of approaches.

Anna Durrance-Bagale, Manar Marzouk, Lam Sze Tung, Sunanda Agarwal, Zeenathnisa Mougammadou Aribou, Nafeesah Bte Mohamed Ibrahim, Hala Mkhallalati, Sanjida Newaz, Maryam Omar, Mengieng Ung and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
20.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. "What I do not see and others see in me": mutual aid for suicide recovery in Colombia.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Anna Durrance-BagaleSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-6674-1862
Manar MarzoukSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9801-1263
Lam Sze TungSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-6033-262X
Sunanda AgarwalStanford Distinguished Careers Institute, Campus Drive, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0109-2368
Zeenathnisa Mougammadou AribouSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7127-7299
Nafeesah Bte Mohamed IbrahimSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.
Hala MkhallalatiSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-0347-1137
Sanjida NewazDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2039-1366
Maryam OmarChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3519-3706
Mengieng UngSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-1411-5442
Ayshath ZaseelaSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9727-2664
Michiko Nagashima-HayashiSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-3666-7814
Natasha HowardSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-4174-7349
National University of Singapore · SGChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBStanford Health Care · USUniversity of Manitoba · CA

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S013008/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare research, planning, and delivery with minimal community engagement can result in financial wastage, failure to meet objectives, and frustration in the communities that programmes are designed to help. Engaging communities - individual service-users and user groups - in the planning, delivery, and assessment of healthcare initiatives from inception promotes transparency, accountability, and 'ownership'. Health systems affected by conflict must try to ensure that interventions engage communities and do not exacerbate existing problems. Engaging communities in interventions and research on conflict-affected health systems is essential to begin addressing effects on service delivery and access.

objectiveThis review aimed to identify and interrogate the literature on community engagement in health system interventions and research in conflict-affected settings.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review using Arksey & O'Malley's framework, synthesising the data descriptively.

resultsWe included 19 of 2,355 potential sources identified. Each discussed at least one aspect of community engagement, predominantly participatory methods, in 12 conflict-affected countries. Major lessons included the importance of engaging community and religious leaders, as well as people of lower socioeconomic status, in both designing and delivering culturally acceptable healthcare; mobilising community members and involving them in programme delivery to increase acceptability; mediating between governments, armed groups and other organisations to increase the ability of healthcare providers to remain in post; giving community members spaces for feedback on healthcare provision, to provide communities with evidence that programmes and initiatives are working.

conclusionCommunity engagement in identifying and setting priorities, decision-making, implementing, and evaluating potential solutions helps people share their views and encourages a sense of ownership and increases the likely success of healthcare interventions. However, engaging communities can be particularly difficult in conflict-affected settings, where priorities may not be easy to identify, and many other factors, such as safety, power relations, and entrenched inequalities, must be considered.

Indexed as

Government ProgramsMedical AssistanceGovernmentHealth FacilitiesHealth Services ResearchHumansco-creationcommunity engagementconflictHealth systemspeople-centred healthcare

Identifiers

PMID35762841
PMCPMC9246261
OpenAlexW4283652429

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.