Authors: Yusuf Ahmad, Lucia D Ambruoso, Pamela Abbotta
Abstract: – Background: Health research widely promotes community engagement and involvement, yet no previous studies have examined approaches, operationalisation, and efficiency across disciplines and regions. Methods: We conducted a scoping review with Joanna Briggs Institute guidance and reported in line with PRISMA-ScR. We searched Google Scholar, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL, and sampled grey literature from relevant organisational websites. We included empirical health research and grey literature published in English (January 2015–June 2025). References were screened against the inclusion criteria, and relevant data were extracted and charted deductively against Arnstein’s Ladder of Citizen Participation. Results: No grey literature met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four peer-reviewed publications were included. 16 engagement approaches were identified. Diverse, yet context-specific. There is a noteworthy overlap in approaches, designs and methods. 87.5% were qualitative, 8.3% quantitative, and 4.16% mixed-methods. 79.5% were used to report findings from a research project, and 21% were used to discuss the process and practice of community engagement itself. The evidence base was geographically concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa (n=18), with limited representation from Latin America and other LMIC regions. 87.5% have engagement consistent with “citizen power” (partnership, delegated power, or citizen control), with communities participating as partners or having substantial influence over the direction of engagement, yet tokenistic practices persist. Conclusions: CEI in LMIC empirical health research is feasible and often substantive, but reporting and evaluation are inconsistent, and equity gaps persist. A clearer taxonomy, transparent documentation of decision rights and resourcing, and pragmatic measures of CEI quality and impact are required.
DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23255715
