Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40983369›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2025

The localisation of humanitarian response to conflict and displacement: a scoping review from a health systems perspective.

Michael McGrath, Gülşah Kurt, Erin Davis, Salah Addin Lekkeh, Ammar Beetar, Muhammad Kamruzzaman Mozumder, Fatema Almeamari, Simon Rosenbaum, Ruth Wells

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Michael McGrathDiscipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia michael.mcgrath@unsw.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-0465-176X
Gülşah KurtDiscipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Erin DavisDiscipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Salah Addin LekkehHope Revival Organization, Gaziantep, Turkey.
Ammar BeetarHope Revival Organization, Gaziantep, Turkey.
Muhammad Kamruzzaman MozumderDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Fatema AlmeamariDepartment of Psychology, Koc Universitesi, Istanbul, Turkey.
Simon RosenbaumDiscipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8984-4941
Ruth WellsDiscipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Grand Bargain Agreement at the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit emphasised the need to reform the humanitarian system. Central to these reforms were commitments to localise humanitarian assistance by increasing funding and decision-making for local and national responders and shifting control away from international actors. Localisation has the potential to improve the operational effectiveness of humanitarian assistance, strengthen local health systems and empower affected communities; however, progress has been slow. We aimed to identify the barriers, facilitators and outcomes of localised humanitarian health response for populations affected by conflict and displacement.

methodsWe searched six academic databases for empirical studies published between January 2016 and May 2024 describing localised or locally led health organisations, workers or service delivery for populations affected by conflict and displacement in low- and middle-income countries. We adopt a health systems perspective and results are presented as a narrative summary using the WHO Health System Building Blocks framework.

resultsOf the 48 included studies, 32 used qualitative methodologies. Efforts to localise humanitarian responses were hampered by multiple challenges relating to funding, leadership and relationships with international actors. Locally led humanitarian response improved the coverage, reach and responsiveness of health interventions, as well as the speed and efficiency of service delivery in conflict and displacement settings. However, there was little evidence of an increase in the meaningful participation or empowerment of affected communities and other local actors. Instead, international actors leveraged these operational advantages while retaining control over funding and decision-making. This dynamic increased workforce stressors for local staff and undermined local leadership and structures.

conclusionFor genuine localisation to be achieved, the humanitarian system must foster equitable partnerships and funding mechanisms that empower local organisations and address the structural barriers that perpetuate their exclusion.

Indexed as

AltruismArmed ConflictsDelivery of Health CareRefugeesRelief WorkDeveloping CountriesHumansHealth systemsReview

Identifiers

PMID40983369
PMCPMC12458781

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.