Levels of engagement in participatory health systems strengthening: A systematic literature review

Jesse David Marinus , Chaïm la Roi , Christiaan Boerma
{"title":"Levels of engagement in participatory health systems strengthening: A systematic literature review","authors":"Jesse David Marinus ,&nbsp;Chaïm la Roi ,&nbsp;Christiaan Boerma","doi":"10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Engaging participants in Health Systems Strengthening (HSS) facilitates a more person-centred approach that better addresses the complex interplay within health systems and helps to bridge the gap between knowledge and practical application. Although various participatory approaches are already used, it remains unclear how, where, and why participants are engaged within HSS. This systematic literature review investigates the extent of participant engagement, the motivations behind participatory approaches, and the specific health system building blocks that are researched. A comprehensive search identified 140 empirical studies published in English up to May 2023, selected for their focus on HSS and use of participatory approaches involving communities, patients, or citizens. Data were synthesised to assess levels of engagement, motivations, and the health system building blocks targeted.</div><div>Findings reveal that, while participatory HSS studies are increasing in popularity, most studies engage participants primarily in advisory or support roles, with decision-making largely retained by academic researchers, reflecting limited levels of engagement. Common motivations for using participatory approaches include creating change and addressing power dynamics. Additionally, most studies focus on service delivery, with less attention to other critical building blocks, such as health workforce, information systems, and financing. The review further reveals that Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) and Participatory Action Research (PAR) are the most frequently utilised approaches; however, no substantial differences in engagement levels or motivations were found between the different approaches. But overall, there is a notable lack of documentation regarding participant engagement, which compromises scientific rigour.</div><div>This review highlights the need to expand focus beyond service delivery to underrepresented health system building blocks and calls for improved documentation of engagement processes and motivations to advance the field of participatory HSS.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74826,"journal":{"name":"Social sciences & humanities open","volume":"11 ","pages":"Article 101246"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social sciences & humanities open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590291124004431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Engaging participants in Health Systems Strengthening (HSS) facilitates a more person-centred approach that better addresses the complex interplay within health systems and helps to bridge the gap between knowledge and practical application. Although various participatory approaches are already used, it remains unclear how, where, and why participants are engaged within HSS. This systematic literature review investigates the extent of participant engagement, the motivations behind participatory approaches, and the specific health system building blocks that are researched. A comprehensive search identified 140 empirical studies published in English up to May 2023, selected for their focus on HSS and use of participatory approaches involving communities, patients, or citizens. Data were synthesised to assess levels of engagement, motivations, and the health system building blocks targeted.
Findings reveal that, while participatory HSS studies are increasing in popularity, most studies engage participants primarily in advisory or support roles, with decision-making largely retained by academic researchers, reflecting limited levels of engagement. Common motivations for using participatory approaches include creating change and addressing power dynamics. Additionally, most studies focus on service delivery, with less attention to other critical building blocks, such as health workforce, information systems, and financing. The review further reveals that Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) and Participatory Action Research (PAR) are the most frequently utilised approaches; however, no substantial differences in engagement levels or motivations were found between the different approaches. But overall, there is a notable lack of documentation regarding participant engagement, which compromises scientific rigour.
This review highlights the need to expand focus beyond service delivery to underrepresented health system building blocks and calls for improved documentation of engagement processes and motivations to advance the field of participatory HSS.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Social sciences & humanities open
Social sciences & humanities open Psychology (General), Decision Sciences (General), Social Sciences (General)
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
159 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信