Common health assets protocol: a mixed-methods, realist evaluation and economic appraisal of how community-led organisations (CLOs) impact on the health and well-being of people living in deprived areas

Rachel Mairi Baker*, Mohasin Ahmed, Marcello Bertotti, John Cassidy, Rejoice Chipuriro, Emma Clewett, Cam Donaldson, Andrew Elders, Lee Ann Fenge, Julie Fox, Karen Galway, Aideen Gildea, Aileen McGuinness, Jennifer McLean, Sarkis Manoukian, Helen Mason, Antony Morgan, Jill Mulholland, Liam O'Hare, Andrew PatersonSam Porter, Jack Rendall, Michael J. Roy, Merron Simpson, Artur Steiner, Michael P. Kelly

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

30 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Introduction: This research investigates how community-led organisations’ (CLOs’) use of assets-based approaches improves health and well-being, and how that might be different in different contexts. Assets-based approaches involve ‘doing with’ rather than ‘doing to’ and bring people in communities together to achieve positive change using their own knowledge, skills and experience. Some studies have shown that such approaches can have a positive effect on health and well-being. However, research is limited, and we know little about which approaches lead to which outcomes and how different contexts might affect success.

Methods and analysis: Using a realist approach, we will work with 15CLOs based in disadvantaged communities in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. A realist synthesis of review papers, and a policy analysis indifferent contexts, precedes qualitative interviews and workshops with stakeholders, to find out how CLOs’ programmes work and identify existing data. We will explore participants’ experiences through: a Q methodology study; participatory photography workshops; qualitative interviews and measure outcomes using a longitudinal survey, with 225 CLO participants, to assess impact for people who connect with the CLOs. An economic analysis will estimate costs and benefits to participants, for different contexts and mechanisms. A ‘Lived Experience Panel’ of people connected with our CLOs as participants or volunteers, will ensure the appropriateness of the research, interpretation and reporting of findings.

Ethics and dissemination: This project, research tools and consent processes have been approved by the Glasgow Caledonian University School of Health and Life Sciences Ethics Committee, and affirmed by Ethics Committees at Bournemouth University, Queen’s University Belfast and the University of East London. Common Health Assets does not involve any National Health Service sites, staff or patients.

Findings will be presented through social media, project website, blogs, policy briefings, journal articles, conferences and visually in short digital stories, and photographic exhibitions.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere069979
Number of pages8
JournalBMJ Open
Volume13
Issue number3
Early online date16 Mar 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 16 Mar 2023

Keywords

  • HEALTH ECONOMICS
  • PUBLIC HEALTH
  • SOCIAL MEDICINE

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Common health assets protocol: a mixed-methods, realist evaluation and economic appraisal of how community-led organisations (CLOs) impact on the health and well-being of people living in deprived areas'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this