An inter-sectoral map of UK policy promoting community engagement and empowerment in health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Issue Strengthening community action, as proposed in the Ottawa Charter, is key to achieving public health goals within a whole-of society approach to health. Community engagement is not a simple intervention as it is shaped by community contexts and policy agendas that can either constrain or enable local action. This has implications for developing an evidence base. Description of problem Changes in UK policy and programme funding have led to a fragmented evidence base and many participatory models not achieving sustainability. To inform an update of public heath guidance, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence commissioned an independent, systematic scoping review to understand UK community engagement policy and practice. This paper presents findings from the documentary analysis of policy themes and concepts. Results After systematic searching and screening, 40 policy and 30 conceptual publications were included and extracted data then mapped onto a matrix. We found that UK policy interest in community engagement in health threads through multiple sectors including health, local government and volunteering. Policy focus was not static; new concepts (eg social action) have emerged since 2000, while others (eg health inequalities) have less prominence. Local government was identified as a key policy actor. Community empowerment was a common theme but concepts were not used consistently. Lessons Community engagement in health has policy significance but can lack visibility because it is applied across multiple policy areas and is cross referenced to different concepts. This is important for promoting intersectoral action involving communities and for building healthy public policy. Our conclusions are that community engagement is best used as a broad organising concept as it covers a range of policy areas and terms. This needs to be accounted for in building an evidence base for participatory methods within and between countries. Key messages: A mapping of UK policy since 2000 shows that community engagement in health can be promoted through a range of policy initiatives and sectors; however there is change through policy cycles The evidence base on community engagement can appear fragmented, results from this policy analysis help identify related concepts and terms
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.030 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".