ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
A mixed methods analysis of community capacity to address health equity in the rural Southern U.S.
Article in International journal for equity in 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.
- Being part of change: partner perspectives on capacity building in a long-term community-engaged health equity initiative.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultisectoral community coalitions have the potential to mobilize change toward health equity. The Two Georgias Initiative supported multisectoral community coalitions with a major goal of building community capacity to address health equity in 11 rural counties in the state of Georgia.
methodsA cross-site, mixed methods evaluation assessed changes in community capacity over the course of the five-year initiative. Coalition member surveys at two points in time, four rounds of key informant interviews, and document review informed various dimensions of community capacity, operationalized as resident participation, leadership development, skills gained, network expansion, resource mobilization, critical reflection, and redistribution of community power.
resultsResident participation (i.e., coalition membership, community assessment, programmatic activities), leadership opportunities (i.e., coalition positions, collecting data, leading implementation, volunteering), skill gains (i.e., understanding health equity and root causes, having difficult conversations about race and class), and strengthened partnerships (i.e., for sharing information, coordinating services, and joint projects) were the most widespread capacity outcomes across the coalitions. Resource mobilization varied by coalition, with significant external funding leveraged by several. As an indicator of critical reflection on health equity, coalitions used quantitative data to identify gaps/inequities, conducted focus groups with members of priority populations, attempted to give everyone a voice, made concerted efforts to reach underserved, disadvantaged and other groups, and took services directly to those in need. Actions to address root causes of inequities within counties were less common as were shifts in community power toward health equity, although several notable examples were shared.
conclusionsCommunity coalitions are an effective mechanism for strengthening selected dimensions of community capacity for health equity in rural communities. Deeper engagement of those most affected by health inequities and actions toward addressing structural and policy drivers of these inequities may require the active centering of health equity from project inception. Clarity of purpose (i.e., racial/income inequities or rural/urban inequities), technical support for community empowerment, regional networking for policy change, and longer-timeframes may also be beneficial.
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.