'Working relationships' across difference - a realist review of community engagement with malaria research

Enhanced or hindered research benefits? A realist review of community engagement and participatory research practices for non-communicable disease prevention in low- and middle-income countries

INTRODUCTION

Community engagement and participatory research are widely used and considered important for ethical health research and interventions. Based on calls to unpack their complexity and observed biases in their favour, we conducted a realist review with a focus on non-communicable disease prevention. The aim was to generate an understanding of how and why engagement or participatory practices enhance or hinder the benefits of non-communicable disease research and interventions in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

We retroductively formulated theories based on existing literature and realist interviews. After initial searches, preliminary theories and a search strategy were developed. We searched three databases and screened records with a focus on theoretical and empirical relevance. Insights about contexts, strategies, mechanisms and outcomes were extracted and synthesised into six theories. Five realist interviews were conducted to complement literature-based theorising. The final synthesis included 17 quality-appraised articles describing 15 studies.

RESULTS

We developed six theories explaining how community engagement or participatory research practices either enhance or hinder the benefits of non-communicable disease research or interventions. Benefit-enhancing mechanisms include community members' agency being realised, a shared understanding of the benefits of health promotion, communities feeling empowered, and community members feeling solidarity and unity. Benefit-hindering mechanisms include community members' agency remaining unrealised and participation being driven by financial motives or reputational expectations.

CONCLUSION

Our review challenges assumptions about community engagement and participatory research being solely beneficial in the context of non-communicable disease prevention in low- and middle-income countries. We present both helpful and harmful pathways through which health and research outcomes are affected. Our practical recommendations relate to maximising benefits and minimising harm by addressing institutional inflexibility and researcher capabilities, managing expectations on research, promoting solidarity in solving public health challenges and sharing decision-making power.

Understanding communication in community engagement for maternal and newborn health programmes in low- and middle-income countries: a realist review

As community engagement (CE) is implemented for sustainable maternal and newborn health (MNH) programming, it is important to determine how these approaches work. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have become a particular focus for MNH CE activities due to their high burden of maternal and neonatal deaths. MNH messaging and communication to engage communities are likely to differ by context, but how these approaches are actually developed and implemented within CE is not well understood. Understanding how communications in CE actually work is vital in the translation of learnings across programmes and to inform future projects. The purpose of this realist review is to describe how, why, to what extent and for whom communications in CE contribute to MNH programming in LMICs. After searching academic databases, grey literature and literature suggested by the expert advisory committee, documents were included if they described the CE communication processes/activities used for MNH programming in an LMIC. Relevant documents were assessed for richness (depth of insight) and rigor (trustworthiness and coherence of data/theories). Data were extracted as context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) and synthesized into demi-regularities to contribute to theory refinement. After screening 416 records, 45 CMOCs were extracted from 11 documents. This informed five programme theories explaining that communications in CE for an MNH programme work when: communities are actively involved throughout the programme, the messaging and programme are acceptable, communication sources are trusted, the community has a reciprocal relationship with the programme and the community sees value in the programme. While these findings reflect what is often anecdotally known in CE or acknowledged in communications theory, they have implications for policy, practice and research by highlighting the importance of centring the community's needs and priorities throughout the stages of developing and implementing communications for CE in MNH.

Community engagement among forest goers in a malaria prophylaxis trial: implementation challenges and implications

BACKGROUND

Malaria transmission in Southeast Asia is increasingly confined to forests, where marginalized groups are exposed primarily through their work. Anti-malarial chemoprophylaxis may help to protect these people. This article examines the effectiveness and practical challenges of engaging forest-goers to participate in a randomized controlled clinical trial of anti-malarial chemoprophylaxis with artemether-lumefantrine (AL) versus a control (multivitamin, MV) for malaria in northeast Cambodia.

METHODS

The impact of engagement in terms of uptake was assessed as the proportion of people who participated during each stage of the trial: enrolment, compliance with trial procedures, and drug intake. During the trial, staff recorded the details of engagement meetings, including the views and opinions of participants and community representatives, the decision-making processes, and the challenges addressed during implementation.

RESULTS

In total, 1613 participants were assessed for eligibility and 1480 (92%) joined the trial, 1242 (84%) completed the trial and received prophylaxis (AL: 82% vs MV: 86%, p = 0.08); 157 (11%) were lost to follow-up (AL: 11% vs MV: 11%, p = 0.79); and 73 (5%) discontinued the drug (AL-7% vs MV-3%, p = 0.005). The AL arm was associated with discontinuation of the study drug (AL: 48/738, 7% vs 25/742, 3%; p = 0.01). Females (31/345, 9%) were more likely (42/1135, 4%) to discontinue taking drugs at some point in the trial (p = 0.005). Those (45/644, 7%) who had no previous history of malaria infection were more likely to discontinue the study drug than those (28/836, 3%) who had a history of malaria (p = 0.02). Engagement with the trial population was demanding because many types of forest work are illegal; and the involvement of an engagement team consisting of representatives from the local administration, health authorities, community leaders and community health workers played a significant role in building trust. Responsiveness to the needs and concerns of the community promoted acceptability and increased confidence in taking prophylaxis among participants. Recruitment of forest-goer volunteers to peer-supervise drug administration resulted in high compliance with drug intake. The development of locally-appropriate tools and messaging for the different linguistic and low-literacy groups was useful to ensure participants understood and adhered to the trial procedures. It was important to consider forest-goers` habits and social characteristics when planning the various trial activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The comprehensive, participatory engagement strategy mobilized a wide range of stakeholders including study participants, helped build trust, and overcame potential ethical and practical challenges. This locally-adapted approach was highly effective as evidenced by high levels of trial enrolment, compliance with trial procedures and drug intake.

How should communities be meaningfully engaged (if at all) when setting priorities for biomedical research? Perspectives from the biomedical research community

BACKGROUND

There is now rising consensus that community engagement is ethically and scientifically essential for all types of health research. Yet debate continues about the moral aims, methods and appropriate timing in the research cycle for community engagement to occur, and whether the answer should vary between different types of health research. Co-design and collaborative partnership approaches that involve engagement during priority-setting, for example, are common in many forms of applied health research but are not regular practice in biomedical research. In this study, we empirically examine the normative question: should communities be engaged when setting priorities for biomedical research projects, and, if so, how and for what purpose?

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 31 members of the biomedical research community from the UK, Australia, and African countries who had engaged communities in their work. Interview data were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Our study shows that biomedical researchers and community engagement experts strongly support engagement in biomedical research priority-setting, except under certain circumstances where it may be harmful to communities. However, they gave two distinct responses on what ethical purpose it should serve-either empowerment or instrumental goals-and their perspectives on how it should achieve those goals also varied. Three engagement approaches were suggested: community-initiated, synergistic, and consultative. Pre-engagement essentials and barriers to meaningful engagement in biomedical research priority-setting are also reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers initial evidence that meaningful engagement in priority-setting should potentially be defined slightly differently for biomedical research relative to certain types of applied health research and that engagement practice in biomedical research should not be dominated by instrumental goals and approaches, as is presently the case.

Embracing context: Lessons from designing a dialogue-based intervention to address vaccine hesitancy

Dialogue with people who are vaccine hesitant has been recommended as a method to increase vaccination uptake. The process of cultivating dialogue is shaped by the context in which it occurs, yet the development of interventions addressing vaccine hesitancy with dialogue often overlooks the role of context and favors relatively fixed solutions. This reflexive paper shares three key lessons related to context for dialogue-based interventions. These lessons emerged during a participatory research project to develop a pilot intervention to create open dialogue among healthcare workers in Belgium about COVID-19 vaccination concerns. Through a mixed methods study consisting of in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and surveys, we engaged healthcare workers in the design, testing, and evaluation of a digital platform featuring text-based and video-based (face-to-face) interactions. The lessons are: (1) what dialogue means, entails, and requires can vary for a population and context, (2) inherent tension exists between helping participants voice (and overcome) their concerns and exposing them to others' ideas that may exacerbate those concerns, and (3) interactional exchanges (e.g., with peers or experts) that matter to participants may shape the dialogue in terms of its content and form. We suggest that having a discovery-orientation-meaning to work not only inductively and iteratively but also reflexively-is a necessary part of the development of dialogue-based interventions. Our case also sheds light on the influences between: dialogue topic/content, socio-political landscape, population, intervention aim, dialogue form, ethics, researcher position, and types of interactional exchanges.

A Realist-Informed Review of Digital Empowerment Strategies for Adolescents to Improve Their Sexual and Reproductive Health and Well-being

The use of digital technologies for health has been rapidly gaining ground in the last decade, including as a strategy to empower adolescents living in urban resource-constrained settings. Nevertheless, unclarity and incoherence remain regarding which programme strategies generate which outcomes, as well as regarding the importance of context. We set out to answer the question "How do digital empowerment strategies work to improve adolescent health and well-being?". We conducted a realist-informed review, the first on this subject matter to our knowledge. The realist methodology is geared towards the understanding of socially complex interventions, such as digital empowerment. We synthesized the data into a programme theory uncovering social mechanisms and context conditions underlying specific programme strategies. We found that digital technologies enlarge the space for adolescents to access information to health services on their own terms and provide anonymity, which leads to a sense of safety if access is not curbed by gatekeepers. If adolescents have access to information adapted to their needs, they will be able to make informed decisions, and this will contribute to improved health outcomes because their better understanding enlarges their sense of individual agency. We identified two main gaps in the literature on digital interventions for adolescents. Both are related to an under-theoretisation of the concepts the programmes rely on in implementation: (1) the urban environment the programme has to operate in and its meaning for the adolescents; (2) the socio-developmental stage of the adolescents the programmes work in.

A realist review protocol on communications for community engagement in maternal and newborn health programmes in low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Community engagement (CE) has been increasingly implemented across health interventions, including for maternal and newborn health (MNH). This may take various forms, from participatory women's groups and community health committees to public advocacy days. While research suggests a positive influence of CE on MNH outcomes, such as mortality or care-seeking behaviour, there is a need for further evidence on the processes of CE in different settings in order to inform the future development and implementation of CE across programmes. Communication is an integral component of CE serving as a link between the programme and community. The aim of the realist review described in this protocol is to understand how, why, to what extent, and for whom CE contributes to intended and unintended outcomes in MNH programming, focusing on the communication components of CE.

METHODS

Realist review methodology will be used to provide a causal understanding of what communication for CE interventions in MNH programming work, for whom, to what extent, why, and how. This will be done by developing and refining programme theories on communications for CE in MNH through a systematic review of the literature and engaging key experts for input and feedback. By extrapolating context-mechanism-outcome configurations, this review seeks to understand how certain contexts trigger or inhibit specific mechanisms and what outcomes this interaction generates when communication in CE interventions is used in MNH programming.

DISCUSSION

A realist philosophy is well-suited to address the aims of this study because of the complex nature of CE. The review findings will be used to inform a realist evaluation case study of CE for an MNH programme in order to ascertain transferable findings that can inform and guide engagement activities in various settings. Findings will also be shared with stakeholders and experts involved in the consultative processes of the review (through workshops or policy briefs) in order to ensure the relevance of these findings to policy and practice.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022293564.

Community engagement for malaria elimination in the Greater Mekong Sub-region: a qualitative study among malaria researchers and policymakers

Background

Community engagement has increasingly received attention in malaria research and programme interventions, particularly as countries aim for malaria elimination. Although community engagement strategies and activities are constantly developing, little is known about how those who implement research or programmes view community engagement. This article explores the perspectives of researchers and policy makers in the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS) on community engagement for malaria control and elimination.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 17 policymakers and 15 senior researchers working in the field of malaria. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed in English. Transcribed data were analysed using deductive and inductive approaches in QSR NVivo. Themes and sub-themes were generated.

Results

Researchers and policymakers emphasized the importance of community engagement in promoting participation in malaria research and interventions. Building trust with the community was seen as crucial. Respondents emphasized involving authority/leadership structures and highlighted the need for intense and participatory engagement. Geographic remoteness, social, cultural, and linguistic diversity were identified as barriers to meaningful engagement. Local staff were described as an essential ‘connect’ between researchers or policymakers and prospective participants. Sharing information with community members, using various strategies including creative and participatory methods were highlighted.

Conclusions

Policymakers and researchers involved in malaria prevention and control in the GMS viewed community engagement as crucial for promoting participation in research or programmatic interventions. Given the difficulties of the ‘last mile’ to elimination, sustained investment in community engagement is needed in isolated areas of the GMS where malaria transmission continues. Involving community-based malaria workers is ever more critical to ensure the elimination efforts engage hard-to-reach populations in remote areas of GMS.