ArticleBMJ public health2025
Qualitative evaluation of two London Faith and Health Networks: lessons learnt from a model of an interface between health systems and minority communities.
Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Engaging with faith communities to tackle ethnic health inequalities in the UK: a scoping review.BMJ public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ethnic and religious minorities in the UK had a higher risk of severe illness and mortality from COVID-19 in 2020-2021, yet were less likely to receive vaccinations. Two Faith Health Networks (FHNs) were established in London in 2022-2024 as a partnership approach to mitigate health inequalities among Muslim and Jewish Londoners through a health system-community collaboration. By evaluating the FHNs, this study aimed to examine: the organisational processes required for FHNs to serve as a model of interface between health systems and minority communities; the role these networks play in addressing public health inequalities; and implications for their future development and sustainability. Methods: A qualitative evaluation of the two FHNs was conducted using semi-structured interviews (n=19) with members of the 'London Jewish Health Partnership' and the 'London Muslim Health Network'. Participant clusters included public health professionals, healthcare workers, community representatives and local government workers. Results: The FHNs shared similar structures of leadership, but differed in core membership, which influenced their access to expertise and the activities developed. They were found to perform a key conduit role by integrating expertise from within the health system and faith communities to address the needs and expectations of underserved communities, with the ultimate goal of addressing health inequalities through the design of tailored campaigns and services. Emerging themes for developing an FHN model included enhancing their sustainability by determining funding allocation, strategic integration into health systems and identifying the appropriate geographical scope to sustain their impact. Further implications included recognition of intersectionality, addressing diverse needs within faith communities and trust-building approaches. Conclusion: This evaluation offers insights into developing partnership models between faith-based organisations and health sectors to foster relationships with underserved communities. These findings provide valuable considerations for teams navigating the priority of health equity and community engagement as part of our learning from the pandemic to support the development of FHNs across different faith communities, not just for vaccine uptake, but to support the broader health and well-being of communities more widely.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.