Evidence mapPaperPMID 37033017Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2023

Success of community-based system dynamics in prevention interventions: A systematic review of the literature.

Tiana Felmingham, Kathryn Backholer, Elizabeth Hoban, Andrew D Brown, Phoebe Nagorcka-Smith, Steven Allender

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
20.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Systems approaches in public health: beyond mapping the causes.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tiana FelminghamGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Kathryn BackholerGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Elizabeth HobanSchool of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Andrew D BrownGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Phoebe Nagorcka-SmithGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Steven AllenderGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Deakin University · AU

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systems thinking approaches are increasingly being used to help communities understand and develop responses to preventing complex health problems. Less is known about how success is characterized and what influences success in these approaches. We present a systematic review of how concepts of success are understood and evaluated in the peer reviewed literature of studies using systems thinking in community prevention. We searched five databases for peer-reviewed literature published between 2000 and 2022, with search terms related to systems thinking, prevention and community. Studies were included if they; reported using community-based systems thinking to prevent a public health problem; described the engagement and empowerment of community members to address a public health issue; and, were published in English. Thirty-four articles were identified from 10 countries. Twenty-one aimed to prevent a chronic disease (e.g., obesity) and 16 measured success using specific tools, 10 of which used semi-structured interviews or surveys. Measures of success included implementation processes, cultural appropriateness, the number or type of actions implemented, effectiveness of community action, and changes in individual thinking or mental models, population health outcomes, data collected, or systems level measures. Implementation factors influencing success included the capacity to engage participants, composition and experience of facilitators, strength of coordination teams, allocation of resources, adaptation to participant feedback, use of multiple systems approaches, workshop process providing time and methods to allow new insights, flexible delivery, and diversity of perspectives. Findings from each of the articles indicated that approaches increased a range of outcomes including community action, strategic thinking, future planning and evaluation, community buy-in, community voice, contribution and leadership, in addition to developing shared visions and goals and creating new, ongoing collaborations, among many others. Measures of success varied, suggesting more empirical reporting of proposed outcomes of system science in communities would be valuable. While the measurement of success in the use of systems thinking in community-based prevention efforts is limited, there are helpful examples we can look to for future measurement of success.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationObesityHumansPublic Healthcommunity-based system dynamicsevaluationpreventionsuccesssystematic reviewsystems thinking

Identifiers

PMID37033017
PMCPMC10080052
OpenAlexW4360871170

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.