Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38898512›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2024

Community led health promotion to counter stigma and increase trust amongst priority populations: lessons from the 2022-2023 UK mpox outbreak.

Colette Pang Biesty, Charlotte Hemingway, James Woolgar, Katrina Taylor, Mark David Lawton, Muhammad Wali Waheed, Dawn Holford, Miriam Taegtmeyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. BMJ open · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational
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.

Colette Pang BiestyDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust/Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7097-0721
Charlotte HemingwayDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK. Charlotte.hemingway@lstmed.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8993-3795
James WoolgarPublic Health Department, Liverpool City Council, Liverpool, UK.
Katrina TaylorSahir House, Liverpool, UK.
Mark David LawtonLiverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1334-5764
Muhammad Wali WaheedLiverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Dawn HolfordSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6392-3991
Miriam TaegtmeyerDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5377-2536

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStigma, lack of trust in authorities, and poor knowledge can prevent health-seeking behaviour, worsen physical and mental health, and undermine efforts to control transmission during disease outbreaks. These factors are particularly salient with diseases such as mpox, for which 96% of cases in the 2022-2023 UK outbreak were identified among gay, bisexual, queer and men who have sex with men (MSM). This study explored stigma and health-seeking behaviour in Liverpool through the lens of the recent mpox outbreak.

methodsPrimary sources of data were interviews with national and regional key informants involved in the mpox response, and participatory workshops with priority populations. Workshop recruitment targeted Grindr users (geosocial dating/hookup app) and at risk MSM; immigrant, black and ethnic minority MSM; and male sex workers in Liverpool. Data were analysed using a deductive framework approach, building on the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework.

resultsKey informant interviews (n = 11) and five workshops (n = 15) were conducted. There were prevalent reports of anticipated and experienced stigma due to mpox public health messaging alongside high demand and uptake of the mpox vaccine and regular attendance at sexual health clinics. Respondents believed the limited impact of stigma on health-seeking behaviour was due to actions by the LGBTQ + community, the third sector, and local sexual health clinics. Key informants from the LGBTQ + community and primary healthcare felt their collective action to tackle mpox was undermined by central public health authorities citing under-resourcing; a reliance on goodwill; poor communication; and tokenistic engagement. Mpox communication was further challenged by a lack of evidence on disease transmission and risk. This challenge was exacerbated by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the scientific community, public perceptions of infectious disease, and trust in public health authorities.

conclusionsThe LGBTQ + community and local sexual health clinics took crucial actions to counter stigma and support health seeking behaviour during the 2022-2023 UK mpox outbreak. Lessons from rights based and inclusive community-led approaches during outbreaks should be heeded in the UK, working towards more meaningful and timely collaboration between affected communities, primary healthcare, and regional and national public health authorities.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksHealth PromotionSexual and Gender MinoritiesSocial StigmaTrustAdultCOVID-19Homosexuality, MaleHumansMaleMpox, MonkeypoxPatient Acceptance of Health CareQualitative ResearchUnited Kingdommpoxpandemic preparednessparticipatory health researchpublic health messaging

Identifiers

PMID38898512
PMCPMC11188168

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.