IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i7p5341-d1112227.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community Organising Frameworks, Models, and Processes to Improve Health: A Systematic Scoping Review

Author

Listed:
  • Shanti Kadariya

    (School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia)

  • Lauren Ball

    (School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia
    School of SHS–Nutrition and Dietetics, Griffith University, Gold Coast 4215, Australia)

  • David Chua

    (School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia)

  • Henriette Ryding

    (School of SHS–Nutrition and Dietetics, Griffith University, Gold Coast 4215, Australia)

  • Julie Hobby

    (School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia)

  • Julie Marsh

    (School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia)

  • Karly Bartrim

    (School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia)

  • Lana Mitchell

    (School of SHS–Nutrition and Dietetics, Griffith University, Gold Coast 4215, Australia)

  • Joy Parkinson

    (School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia
    Australian eHealth Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Herston 4029, Australia)

Abstract

Community involvement engages, empowers, and mobilises people to achieve their shared goals by addressing structural inequalities in the social and built environment. Through this review, we summarised published information on models, frameworks, and/or processes of community organising used in the context of health initiatives or interventions and documented the outcomes following their use. A systematic scoping review was conducted in three databases with no restrictions on the date of publication, country, or written language. Out of 5044 studies, 38 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The targeted health outcomes explored by the studies were diverse and included sub-domains such as the promotion of a healthy lifestyle, sexual and reproductive health, access to healthcare and equity, and substance abuse and chronic disease management. The outcomes of most initiatives or interventions were promising, with positive changes reported for the target populations. A wide variation was noted in the models, frameworks, or processes of community organising utilised in these studies. We concluded that variation implies that no single model, framework, or process seems to have predominance over others in implementing community organising as a vehicle of positive social change within the health domain. The review also highlighted the need for a more standardised approach to the implementation and evaluation of these initiatives. We recommend that it is essential to foster public and non-governmental sector partnerships to promote community-driven health promotion efforts for a more sustainable approach to these initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanti Kadariya & Lauren Ball & David Chua & Henriette Ryding & Julie Hobby & Julie Marsh & Karly Bartrim & Lana Mitchell & Joy Parkinson, 2023. "Community Organising Frameworks, Models, and Processes to Improve Health: A Systematic Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-40, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:7:p:5341-:d:1112227
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/7/5341/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/7/5341/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Santilli, A. & Carroll-Scott, A. & Ickovics, J.R., 2016. "Applying community organizing principles to assess health needs in New Haven, Connecticut," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(5), pages 841-847.
    2. Haseda, Maho & Takagi, Daisuke & Kondo, Katsunori & Kondo, Naoki, 2019. "Effectiveness of community organizing interventions on social activities among older residents in Japan: A JAGES quasi-experimental study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mio Kitamura & Takaharu Goto & Shinji Fujiwara & Yasuhiko Shirayama, 2021. "Did “ Kayoinoba ” Prevent the Decline of Mental and Physical Functions and Frailty for the Home-Based Elderly during the COVID-19 Pandemic?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-10, September.
    2. Maria Gilson deValpine & Laura Hunt Trull, 2019. "Health Equity in Community Assessments: A Participatory Approach in Rural Virginia," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, March.
    3. Kim, Hongjik & Usui, Hiroyuki & Asami, Yasushi & Hino, Kimihiro, 2022. "A simulation of allocation of participants engaging in group activities at community salons: Accessibility and self-stigma," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:7:p:5341-:d:1112227. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.