Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40518975›Full record

ArticlePrimary health care research & development2025

Co-design of interventions and services with structurally marginalized populations in the context of maternal and early childhood primary care: a rapid scoping review.

Lucie Vicat-Blanc, Lisa Merry, Marie-Christine Harguindéguy-Lincourt, Yujia Tang, Andraea Van Hulst

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Primary health care research & development, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Lucie Vicat-BlancIngram School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Québec, Canada.
Lisa MerryFaculté des sciences infirmières, Université de Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Marie-Christine Harguindéguy-LincourtLa Maison Bleue, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Yujia TangIngram School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Québec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6479-2623
Andraea Van HulstIngram School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Québec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5743-4876

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo synthesize evidence on approaches used in the co-design of maternal and early childhood primary care interventions with structurally marginalized populations.

backgroundInvolving end-users when developing health interventions can enhance outcomes. There is limited knowledge on how to effectively engage structurally marginalized populations (i.e., groups that are affected by structural inequities resulting in a disproportionate burden of social exclusion and poor health) when co-designing maternal child primary care interventions.

methodsA rapid scoping review was conducted by searching EMBASE and CINAHL for studies indexed between January 2010 and December 2024. Peer-reviewed studies describing co-designed health interventions or services tailored to structurally marginalized populations during prenatal, postpartum, or early childhood periods were included if they reported on one or multiple steps of a co-design process in community-based primary care practices in high-income countries.

findingsOf the 5970 records that were screened, nine studies met the inclusion criteria. The co-designed interventions included three eHealth tools, a health- and social-care hub, a mental health service, a health literacy program, an antenatal care uptake intervention, an inventory of parenting support strategies, and a fetal alcohol spectrum disorder prevention campaign. Women, mothers, fathers, and health- and social-service providers contributed to the co-design process by participating in workshops, focus groups, individual interviews, or surveys. They provided feedback on intervention prototypes, existing resources, and new intervention designs or practice models. Ethical and practical considerations related to the population and context (e.g., marginalization) were not consistently addressed.

conclusionThis synthesis on intervention co-design approaches with structurally marginalized populations can provide guidance for primary care organizations that are considering maternal child health intervention co-design with this clientele. Future work should include a critical reflection on the ethical and practical considerations for co-design with structurally marginalized populations in the context of maternal and early child care.

Indexed as

Maternal-Child Health ServicesPrimary Health CareChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansPregnancyco-designearly childhoodmarginalizationmaternal child healthprimary caresocial isolation

Identifiers

PMID40518975
PMCPMC12175099

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.