Community organizing and public health: a rapid review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Advancing health equity is a global priority within public health, requiring a focus on structural determinants of health and power imbalances. Community organizing is one strategy to cultivate community power and advance health equity by challenging oppressive systems. While examples of public health partnering with community-organizing groups and utilizing organizing methods can be found in the literature, these strategies remain an underdeveloped area for practice. This rapid review aims to uncover the benefits, challenges, and outcomes of governmental, non-profit, and academic public health partnering with community organizers and/or applying community-organizing methods. METHODS: A rapid review was conducted using PubMed and Cochrane databases. Articles were included if they focused on public health applying community-organizing methods and/or partnering with community-organizing groups, and if they reported benefits, limitations, and/or outcomes for community and/or public health. Eligible articles were primary research, practice reports, or systematic reviews, and were published between 2000 and August 10, 2023. Articles were excluded if they were published outside of Canada, United States, Europe, Australia, or New Zealand; not in English or available online; and unrelated to public health and community organizing. RESULTS: Twenty-four articles met inclusion criteria, including 17 primary research studies and seven practice reports. Topics varied, with environmental health and justice being the most common. Three quantitative articles investigated social capital. Qualitative outcomes revealed 10 themes describing seven benefits and three challenges for public health. Benefits include increased public health effectiveness, set or changed priorities, built community power, enhanced data collection and research, policy changes, built community capacity, and increased social capital. Challenges include administrative barriers, approach differences, and challenges associated with community organizing. Overall, the evidence base reveals a scarcity of research on public health partnering with community organizers or utilizing community-organizing methods. CONCLUSION: The review underscores the capacity of community organizing to advance health equity, enhance public health effectiveness, and contribute diverse benefits to communities. It emphasizes the value of community-organizing partnerships and methods as promising approaches for public health practice, revealing alignment in addressing social and structural determinants of health. The full French translation of this article is available via https://nccdh.ca/fr/resources/entry/community-organizing-and-public-health-a-rapid-review .
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,043 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,010 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».