Successes and Challenges Related to Community Participation in Primary Health Care and Health Programs in the IGAD Region: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For decades, community participation (CP) in primary health care (PHC) and health programs (HP) has played a crucial role in improving health services and their sustainability. This article examines the successes and challenges of CP in the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) region, which includes Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, and Uganda, focusing on the factors influencing and levels of community engagement. This study employs a scoping review based on the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the IAP2 public participation spectrum. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies published up to April 2024. Relevant articles on CP mechanisms in PHC and HP in the IGAD region were selected. In total, 64 articles were included in this scoping review. The studies highlighted various forms and mechanisms of CP, such as the establishment of community health committees and the mobilization of volunteers. Successes included improvements in disease prevention, crisis management, community resilience, and access to maternal and child health services. However, challenges remain, such as communication gaps, resource limitations, cultural barriers, and political instability. Community participation is essential for the success of health programs in the IGAD region. Although significant progress has been made, persistent challenges must be addressed to optimize the impact and sustainability of CP initiatives.
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 | 0.030 | 0.078 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".