↓ Skip to main content

Achieving successful community engagement: a rapid realist review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
357 Mendeley
Title
Achieving successful community engagement: a rapid realist review
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3090-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. De Weger, N. Van Vooren, K. G. Luijkx, C. A. Baan, H. W. Drewes

Abstract

Community engagement is increasingly seen as crucial to achieving high quality, efficient and collaborative care. However, organisations are still searching for the best and most effective ways to engage citizens in the shaping of health and care services. This review highlights the barriers and enablers for engaging communities in the planning, designing, governing, and/or delivering of health and care services on the macro or meso level. It provides policymakers and professionals with evidence-based guiding principles to implement their own effective community engagement (CE) strategies. A Rapid Realist Review was conducted to investigate how interventions interact with contexts and mechanisms to influence the effectiveness of CE. A local reference panel, consisting of health and care professionals and experts, assisted in the development of the research questions and search strategy. The panel's input helped to refine the review's findings. A systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature was conducted. Eight action-oriented guiding principles were identified: Ensure staff provide supportive and facilitative leadership to citizens based on transparency; foster a safe and trusting environment enabling citizens to provide input; ensure citizens' early involvement; share decision-making and governance control with citizens; acknowledge and address citizens' experiences of power imbalances between citizens and professionals; invest in citizens who feel they lack the skills and confidence to engage; create quick and tangible wins; take into account both citizens' and organisations' motivations. An especially important thread throughout the CE literature is the influence of power imbalances and organisations' willingness, or not, to address such imbalances. The literature suggests that 'meaningful participation' of citizens can only be achieved if organisational processes are adapted to ensure that they are inclusive, accessible and supportive of citizens.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 357 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 357 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 61 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 48 13%
Researcher 39 11%
Student > Bachelor 27 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 5%
Other 48 13%
Unknown 117 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 56 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 45 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 37 10%
Psychology 14 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 11 3%
Other 63 18%
Unknown 131 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,149,872
of 25,287,709 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#308
of 8,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,057
of 334,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#14
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,287,709 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,581 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,323 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.