What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping review
Introduction Engaging the community as actors within reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) programmes (referred to as ‘community blank’) has seen increased implementation in recent years. While evidence suggests these approaches are effective, terminology (such as ‘community engag...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2023-02-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Global Health |
| Online Access: | https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/2/e009423.full |
| _version_ | 1828032158411784192 |
|---|---|
| author | Brynne Gilmore Özge Tunçalp Anayda Portela Debra Jackson Sanghita Bhattacharyya Sara Dada Aoife De Brún Olive Cocoman |
| author_facet | Brynne Gilmore Özge Tunçalp Anayda Portela Debra Jackson Sanghita Bhattacharyya Sara Dada Aoife De Brún Olive Cocoman |
| author_sort | Brynne Gilmore |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction Engaging the community as actors within reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) programmes (referred to as ‘community blank’) has seen increased implementation in recent years. While evidence suggests these approaches are effective, terminology (such as ‘community engagement,’ ‘community participation,’ ‘community mobilisation,’ and ‘social accountability’) is often used interchangeably across published literature, contributing to a lack of conceptual clarity in practice. The purpose of this review was to describe and clarify varying uses of these terms in the literature by documenting what authors and implementers report they are doing when they use these terms.Methods Seven academic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Global Health), two grey literature databases (OAIster, OpenGrey) and relevant organisation websites were searched for documents that described ‘community blank’ terms in RMNCH interventions. Eligibility criteria included being published between 1975 and 1 October 2021 and reports or studies detailing the activities used in ‘community blank.’Results A total of 9779 unique documents were retrieved and screened, with 173 included for analysis. Twenty-four distinct ‘community blank’ terms were used across the documents, falling into 11 broader terms. Use of these terms was distributed across time and all six WHO regions, with ‘community mobilisation’, ‘community engagement’ and ‘community participation’ being the most frequently used terms. While 48 unique activities were described, only 25 activities were mentioned more than twice and 19 of these were attributed to at least three different ‘community blank’ terms.Conclusion Across the literature, there is inconsistency in the usage of ‘community blank’ terms for RMNCH. There is an observed interchangeable use of terms and a lack of descriptions of these terms provided in the literature. There is a need for RMNCH researchers and practitioners to clarify the descriptions reported and improve the documentation of ‘community blank’ implementation. This can contribute to a better sharing of learning within and across communities and to bringing evidence-based practices to scale. Efforts to improve reporting can be supported with the use of standardised monitoring and evaluation processes and indicators. Therefore, it is recommended that future research endeavours clarify the operational definitions of ‘community blank’ and improve the documentation of its implementation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T15:01:26Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-dea5e610c6d74d4f9a50d96291854a17 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2059-7908 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T15:01:26Z |
| publishDate | 2023-02-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Global Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-dea5e610c6d74d4f9a50d96291854a172023-02-15T14:00:15ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Global Health2059-79082023-02-018210.1136/bmjgh-2022-009423What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping reviewBrynne Gilmore0Özge Tunçalp1Anayda Portela2Debra Jackson3Sanghita Bhattacharyya4Sara Dada5Aoife De Brún6Olive Cocoman7School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, IrelandUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP),Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneve, SwitzerlandDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, SwitzerlandLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London, UKPublic Health Foundation of India, Gurugram, Haryana, IndiaSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, IrelandSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, IrelandLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UKIntroduction Engaging the community as actors within reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) programmes (referred to as ‘community blank’) has seen increased implementation in recent years. While evidence suggests these approaches are effective, terminology (such as ‘community engagement,’ ‘community participation,’ ‘community mobilisation,’ and ‘social accountability’) is often used interchangeably across published literature, contributing to a lack of conceptual clarity in practice. The purpose of this review was to describe and clarify varying uses of these terms in the literature by documenting what authors and implementers report they are doing when they use these terms.Methods Seven academic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Global Health), two grey literature databases (OAIster, OpenGrey) and relevant organisation websites were searched for documents that described ‘community blank’ terms in RMNCH interventions. Eligibility criteria included being published between 1975 and 1 October 2021 and reports or studies detailing the activities used in ‘community blank.’Results A total of 9779 unique documents were retrieved and screened, with 173 included for analysis. Twenty-four distinct ‘community blank’ terms were used across the documents, falling into 11 broader terms. Use of these terms was distributed across time and all six WHO regions, with ‘community mobilisation’, ‘community engagement’ and ‘community participation’ being the most frequently used terms. While 48 unique activities were described, only 25 activities were mentioned more than twice and 19 of these were attributed to at least three different ‘community blank’ terms.Conclusion Across the literature, there is inconsistency in the usage of ‘community blank’ terms for RMNCH. There is an observed interchangeable use of terms and a lack of descriptions of these terms provided in the literature. There is a need for RMNCH researchers and practitioners to clarify the descriptions reported and improve the documentation of ‘community blank’ implementation. This can contribute to a better sharing of learning within and across communities and to bringing evidence-based practices to scale. Efforts to improve reporting can be supported with the use of standardised monitoring and evaluation processes and indicators. Therefore, it is recommended that future research endeavours clarify the operational definitions of ‘community blank’ and improve the documentation of its implementation.https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/2/e009423.full |
| spellingShingle | Brynne Gilmore Özge Tunçalp Anayda Portela Debra Jackson Sanghita Bhattacharyya Sara Dada Aoife De Brún Olive Cocoman What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping review BMJ Global Health |
| title | What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping review |
| title_full | What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping review |
| title_fullStr | What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping review |
| title_full_unstemmed | What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping review |
| title_short | What’s in a name? Unpacking ‘Community Blank’ terminology in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: a scoping review |
| title_sort | what s in a name unpacking community blank terminology in reproductive maternal newborn and child health a scoping review |
| url | https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/2/e009423.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT brynnegilmore whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview AT ozgetuncalp whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview AT anaydaportela whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview AT debrajackson whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview AT sanghitabhattacharyya whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview AT saradada whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview AT aoifedebrun whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview AT olivecocoman whatsinanameunpackingcommunityblankterminologyinreproductivematernalnewbornandchildhealthascopingreview |