ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026
Mapping power in community engagement: methodological reflections from health emergencies.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Community engagement is increasingly seen as a key component of public health responses to health emergencies. Recent outbreaks, from Ebola in West Africa to COVID-19 across the world, have highlighted the importance of working through existing structures and identifying trusted local leaders who can help response workers design context-appropriate interventions. However, community engagement efforts often rely on homogenous understandings of 'community' that underestimate the significance of power. This creates a risk of exclusionary practices. In this article, we discuss the use of participatory power mapping workshops as a useful method to identify who has authority and who is trusted by whom, and consider its implications for how we think about trust-building during emergencies. We detail the implementation of this method using participatory workshops conducted in Sierra Leone. We show how these workshops provided granular insights on authority structures and the relationship between power and trust. These discussions highlighted that trust is not homogeneous nor static, and helped kickstart conversations about the role of citizens not simply as recipients of health interventions but also as active participants in how health interventions are designed and delivered. Tracing power dynamics with and within communities can help develop allows us to make power visible in health interventions, maintaining a critical lens on how interventions themselves intervene dynamically on its distribution. In practice, a systematic application of this methodology can encourage more diversified community engagement efforts, and potentially set the foundations for citizen-led collective action around health emergency resilience.
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.