A scoping review of community participation in public health research and action during the COVID-19 pandemic: Exploring approaches on the continuum between utilitarianism and empowerment

IF 5 2区医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Social Science & Medicine Pub Date : 2025-09-06 DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118556

Annika Frahsa , Harvy Joy Liwanag , Cristopher Kobler Betancourt , Aziz Mert Ipekci , Beatrice Minder , Diana Schow

{"title":"A scoping review of community participation in public health research and action during the COVID-19 pandemic: Exploring approaches on the continuum between utilitarianism and empowerment","authors":"Annika Frahsa , Harvy Joy Liwanag , Cristopher Kobler Betancourt , Aziz Mert Ipekci , Beatrice Minder , Diana Schow","doi":"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Community participation played a crucial role in addressing health inequities during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in reaching marginalized populations and fostering resilience. Amid the wide variation of participatory approaches in community health—from information dissemination to co-decision-making—, there remains a lack of comprehensive analysis on their implementation, impact, and effectiveness. This scoping review synthesizes participatory approaches used during the pandemic, addressing three key gaps: (1) the depth and breadth of participation, (2) the types of communities engaged and the public health issues addressed, and (3) the impact of participation on community health.</div><div>Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology, we systematically searched nine bibliographic databases, identifying 20,672 records. After removing duplicates and screening articles based on predefined inclusion criteria, we included 127 studies. Our analysis included mapping participation depth using Arnstein's ladder, categorizing motivations as utilitarian or emancipatory, and identifying the types of communities engaged and the community health issues addressed. We also examined community health outcomes and developed a conceptual heuristic framework to better characterize participatory approaches.</div><div>Based on our findings, we propose eight key recommendations for improving the implementation and reporting of participatory approaches in community health. These include providing clear definitions of community and community health, ensuring transparency in participation levels and phases, elaborating on participatory methods, avoiding (re)stigmatization, and promoting community-driven research and action. By enhancing participatory practice and evaluation, these recommendations can support more equitable, effective, and sustainable community health interventions in pandemic contexts and beyond.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49122,"journal":{"name":"Social Science & Medicine","volume":"385 ","pages":"Article 118556"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625008871","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Community participation played a crucial role in addressing health inequities during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in reaching marginalized populations and fostering resilience. Amid the wide variation of participatory approaches in community health—from information dissemination to co-decision-making—, there remains a lack of comprehensive analysis on their implementation, impact, and effectiveness. This scoping review synthesizes participatory approaches used during the pandemic, addressing three key gaps: (1) the depth and breadth of participation, (2) the types of communities engaged and the public health issues addressed, and (3) the impact of participation on community health.

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology, we systematically searched nine bibliographic databases, identifying 20,672 records. After removing duplicates and screening articles based on predefined inclusion criteria, we included 127 studies. Our analysis included mapping participation depth using Arnstein's ladder, categorizing motivations as utilitarian or emancipatory, and identifying the types of communities engaged and the community health issues addressed. We also examined community health outcomes and developed a conceptual heuristic framework to better characterize participatory approaches.

Based on our findings, we propose eight key recommendations for improving the implementation and reporting of participatory approaches in community health. These include providing clear definitions of community and community health, ensuring transparency in participation levels and phases, elaborating on participatory methods, avoiding (re)stigmatization, and promoting community-driven research and action. By enhancing participatory practice and evaluation, these recommendations can support more equitable, effective, and sustainable community health interventions in pandemic contexts and beyond.

查看原文本刊更多论文

COVID-19大流行期间社区参与公共卫生研究和行动的范围审查：探索功利主义和赋权之间的连续性方法

在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间，社区参与在解决卫生不平等问题方面发挥了至关重要的作用，特别是在接触边缘化人群和增强抵御能力方面。从信息传播到共同决策，社区卫生中的参与性方法千差万别，但仍然缺乏对其实施、影响和有效性的全面分析。这一范围审查综合了大流行期间使用的参与性方法，解决了三个关键差距：(1)参与的深度和广度，(2)参与的社区类型和处理的公共卫生问题，以及(3)参与对社区卫生的影响。根据乔安娜布里格斯研究所（JBI）的方法，我们系统地检索了9个书目数据库，确定了20,672条记录。在根据预定义的纳入标准剔除重复和筛选文章后，我们纳入了127项研究。我们的分析包括使用阿恩斯坦阶梯绘制参与深度图，将动机分类为功利主义或解放主义，并确定参与的社区类型和解决的社区健康问题。我们还研究了社区健康结果，并开发了一个概念启发式框架，以更好地表征参与式方法。根据我们的调查结果，我们提出了八项关键建议，以改进社区卫生参与式方法的实施和报告。其中包括提供社区和社区卫生的明确定义，确保参与水平和阶段的透明度，详细阐述参与方法，避免（重新）污名化，以及促进社区驱动的研究和行动。通过加强参与性做法和评价，这些建议可支持在大流行背景下及以后采取更公平、有效和可持续的社区卫生干预措施。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Social Science & Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-

CiteScore

9.10

自引率

5.60%

发文量

762

审稿时长

38 days

期刊介绍： Social Science & Medicine provides an international and interdisciplinary forum for the dissemination of social science research on health. We publish original research articles (both empirical and theoretical), reviews, position papers and commentaries on health issues, to inform current research, policy and practice in all areas of common interest to social scientists, health practitioners, and policy makers. The journal publishes material relevant to any aspect of health from a wide range of social science disciplines (anthropology, economics, epidemiology, geography, policy, psychology, and sociology), and material relevant to the social sciences from any of the professions concerned with physical and mental health, health care, clinical practice, and health policy and organization. We encourage material which is of general interest to an international readership.