Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39356652›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2024

Decolonising humanitarian health: A scoping review of practical guidance.

Amber Clarke, Katharina Richter, Michelle Lokot, Althea-Maria Rivas, Sali Hafez, Neha S Singh

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Ethical Principles and Practices in HIV Acquisition Research in Humanitarian Crises: A Cross-Sectional Study.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Amber ClarkeFAIR Network, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6376-511X
Katharina RichterSchool of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3098-5130
Michelle LokotHealth in Humanitarian Crises Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4406-0166
Althea-Maria RivasSOAS University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Sali HafezHealth in Humanitarian Crises Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1051-1819
Neha S SinghHealth in Humanitarian Crises Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite growing calls and efforts to decolonise global and humanitarian health, there is limited practical guidance for researchers, educators and practitioners on how to do so. This paper fills this gap by offering a narrative exploration of key recommendations on decolonising global/humanitarian health research, partnerships, teaching, organisational structures and other practices. We present concrete guidelines to support humanitarian actors in decolonising their work. We used a scoping review method. The search strategy was built on three overarching themes: decolonising, global health/health and humanitarian crises. We combined a MEDLINE and Web of Science database search with a grey literature search. In total, we screened abstracts and titles of 533 documents, excluding records that did not specifically refer to 'decolonising,' humanitarian and/or global health. We assessed full texts of 58 documents for eligibility, excluding documents that did not include practical recommendations. In total, 15 documents were included in this review. We identified five key themes: organisational structure, strategy and engagement; research partnerships and conceptualisations; funding for research and projects; the research lifecycle; and teaching and the curriculum. The principal finding is that humanitarian actors can decolonise their work by decentralising power, redistributing resources, critically reflecting on their work in the context of the broader socio-political landscape and recovering, centring and valuing marginalised Global South perspectives. Race was not a central analytical category in the reviewed literature, despite being an integral part of historical background narratives. Future research should reflect on practical steps towards racial justice in global/humanitarian health and be focused on ensuring that efforts towards "localisation" or "equitable partnerships" in global health are linked to decolonisation efforts, including in humanitarian health research. Our review underscores the importance of drawing on knowledge created by and for actors based in the Global South.

Identifiers

PMID39356652
PMCPMC11446424

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.