ArticleSystematic reviews2026
Implementation of people-centred, integrated, and hybrid service delivery approaches in place-based initiatives: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundPlace-based initiatives (PBIs) are increasingly being used to address complex and multi-faceted issues that cannot be resolved using conventional policy and service delivery approaches. PBIs are interventions designed and delivered to address the unique circumstances of a place that cannot be resolved using conventional, one-size-fits-all policy approaches. Based on the premise that health and social needs coexist within a community, PBIs adopt people-centred and integrated health and social care approaches. With the emergence of hybrid in-person and remote service delivery approaches, there is an increasing policy mandate to incorporate hybrid service delivery in PBIs. The WHO's integrated and people-centred approach to delivering complex inter-related health and social issues encourages the adoption of these approaches during the implementation of PBI. Nevertheless, there is a limited appreciation of whether and how these approaches are integrated. This research, therefore, takes a novel approach by exploring the implementation of people-centred, integrated, hybrid service delivery approaches in PBIs. The review protocol outlines a plan for exploring community-led, integrated health and social, and hybrid in-person and face-to-face service delivery models in PBIs.
methodsThe proposed scoping review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute approach for conducting scoping reviews and report it according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review-PRISMA-ScR. A search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, AJOL, and African Medicus Index). Articles will be included if they discuss PBIs that have two or all three service delivery approaches: (1) community-led, (2) health and social care integrated approach, and (3) hybrid in-person and remote service delivery. The READ (readying material, extracting data, analyzing data, and distilling findings) approach will be used to analyse the selected data sources. A framework thematic approach will be applied to identify the adoption of the relevant approaches to implementing PBIs. SIGNIFICANCE: We anticipate this review will help researchers, programme designers, and implementers understand how existing tools better address health equity considerations in intersectoral partnerships and pave the way for developing new, comprehensive tools suitable for designing PBIs.
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.