Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32854722›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2020

Global research priorities for social, behavioural and community engagement interventions for maternal, newborn and child health.

Geoffrey Chan, J Douglas Storey, Manoja Kumar Das, Emma Sacks, Mira Johri, Tamar Kabakian-Khasholian, Deepak Paudel, Sachiyo Yoshida, Anayda Portela

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Geoffrey ChanBurnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
J Douglas StoreyJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, United States of America.
Manoja Kumar DasThe INCLEN Trust International, New Delhi, India.
Emma SacksDepartment of Research, Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Mira JohriCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Canada.
Tamar Kabakian-KhasholianDepartment of Health Promotion and Community Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Deepak PaudelSave the Children, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Sachiyo YoshidaDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health and Ageing, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland.
Anayda PortelaDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health and Ageing, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland. portelaa@who.int.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6368-1585
World Health Organization · CHAmerican University of Beirut · LBBurnet Institute · AUCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CAElizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation · USINCLEN Trust International · INJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial, behavioural and community engagement (SBCE) interventions are essential for global maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) strategies. Past efforts to synthesise research on SBCE interventions identified a need for clear priorities to guide future research. WHO led an exercise to identify global research priorities for SBCE interventions to improve MNCH.

methodsWe adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method and combined quantitative and qualitative methods to determine MNCH SBCE intervention research priorities applicable across different contexts. Using online surveys and meetings, researchers and programme experts proposed up to three research priorities and scored the compiled priorities against four criteria - health and social impact, equity, feasibility, and overall importance. Priorities were then ranked by score. A group of 29 experts finalised the top 10 research priorities for each of maternal, newborn or child health and a cross-cutting area.

resultsA total of 310 experts proposed 867 research priorities, which were consolidated into 444 priorities and scored by 280 experts. Top maternal and newborn health priorities focused on research to improve the delivery of SBCE interventions that strengthen self-care/family care practices and care-seeking behaviour. Child health priorities focused on the delivery of SBCE interventions, emphasising determinants of service utilisation and breastfeeding and nutrition practices. Cross-cutting MNCH priorities highlighted the need for better integration of SBCE into facility-based and community-based health services.

conclusionsAchieving global targets for MNCH requires increased investment in SBCE interventions that build capacities of individuals, families and communities as agents of their own health. Findings from this exercise provide guidance to prioritise investments and ensure that they are best directed to achieve global objectives. Stakeholders are encouraged to use these priorities to guide future research investments and to adapt them for country programmes by engaging with national level stakeholders.

Indexed as

Child HealthMaternal Health ServicesChildFemaleGlobal HealthHealth PrioritiesHumansInfant HealthInfant, NewbornMaternal HealthPregnancyResearchchild healthCHNRIcommunity engagementhealth promotionmaternal healthnewborn healthResearch prioritysocial and behavioural change

Identifiers

PMID32854722
PMCPMC7450986
OpenAlexW3081892320

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.