ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Utilization of community engagement in social innovation health projects in low-and-middle income countries: A global sequential mixed methods analysis.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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
Social innovation in health provides solutions to address healthcare delivery gaps using community engagement as a strategy. This study aimed to assess and understand the extent to which social innovation in health projects in LMICs use community engagement approaches in their processes, and how these shape and influence the outcomes of these health projects. We used a sequential mixed methods approach. Semi-structured interviews with social innovators were followed by an online survey among social innovation researchers and implementers. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using NVivo 11, and themes informed development of the survey tool. The survey data were analyzed using STATA version-14 and descriptive statistics were presented. A total of 27 social innovators participated in semi-structured interviews, with 66.7% from Africa. The survey respondents had a mean age of 38.6 years (SD ± 11.5) and most of them were males 141 (51.5%). Community engagement in social innovation health projects was mostly utilized during problem identification 167 (62.1%), intervention identification and design 179 (66.5%), and delivery of interventions 213 (79.2%). Half of the social innovations 135 (52.1%) had very high level of community engagement, described as collaborative or shared leadership. There was differential participation of community stakeholders at different stages of the social innovation projects. Community engagement resulted into intervention acceptance, community ownership, and improved sustainability of interventions. Key sustainability strategies employed in social innovation health projects included capacity building, integration with existing health systems, partnerships, and financial interventions. More than half of the social innovation health projects used community engagement strategies across the various stages of their work. However, there is still need to create strong governance structures, co-create interventions with communities, and have shared responsibilities with the communities in order to attain the desirable high level of community engagement and substantiality in social innovation health projects in LMICs.
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.