Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2015 Aug;49(2 Suppl 1):S116-23.
doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.03.029.

Community Engagement in Family Planning in the U.S.: A Systematic Review

Marion W Carter  1 , Michelle L Tregear  2 , Christina R Lachance  3
Affiliations
Review

Community Engagement in Family Planning in the U.S.: A Systematic Review

Marion W Carter et al. Am J Prev Med. 2015 Aug.

Abstract

Context: Community engagement may include activities that involve community members in the design, implementation, and evaluation of services. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence on this kind of community engagement in U.S. family planning programs, including its effects on various health outcomes, its perceived value, and the barriers and facilitators to implementation.

Evidence acquisition: Using an analytic approach drawn from U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, multiple databases were searched for articles published from 1985 through February 2011 that described studies about community engagement related to family planning. In 2011, relevant articles were reviewed, summarized, and assessed for potential bias using a standardized abstraction process. An updated, targeted review for the 2011-2014 period was conducted in early 2015.

Evidence synthesis: Eleven papers related to family planning were included. All were qualitative, descriptive, and at high risk for bias. Engagement strategies involved various methods for developing educational materials, program development, or program evaluation. All studies reported benefits to community engagement, such as more-appropriate educational materials or more community support for programs. Barriers to engagement included the substantial time and resources required. Four more articles were identified in the targeted, additional search.

Conclusions: Community engagement is described as beneficial across the included studies, but the body of evidence for community engagement in family planning is relatively small. Given the high value ascribed to community engagement, more research and documentation of the various approaches taken and their relative strengths and weaknesses are needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Analytic framework and key questions guiding the systematic review of community engagement.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow diagram of the process of identifying articles to include in this review of community engagement in family planning programs.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium Community Engagement Key Function Committee Task Force on the Principles of Community Engagement. Principles of Community Engagement. 2. Rockville, MD: NIH; 2011.
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Community Engagement to Improve Health. NICE Public Health Guidance. London: NICE; 2008.
    1. WHO. Declaration of Alma-Ata. Presented at: International Conference on Primary Health Care; September 6–12, 1978; Alma-Ata, USSR. 1978.
    1. Public health service: grants for family planning services. Rockville, MD: USDHHS; 2000. 42 CFR Part 59 Subpart A. 10-1-00 ed.
    1. Tregear SJ, Gavin LE, Williams JR. Systematic review evidence methodology: providing quality family planning services. Am J Prev Med. 2015;49(2S1):S23–S30. - PMC - PubMed