Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to map the characteristics of outcomes arising from Community Health Development and Capacity Building in Community Health (CHD/CCH) conducted by public health-related nursing professionals and to identify the types of evidence that inform public health research and practice. METHODS: Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Library. Eligibility was based on the Population-Concept-Context framework: (a) community-dwelling individuals and communities, (b) CHD/CCH activities involving collaborative engagement with residents and stakeholders, and (c) nursing professionals engaged in public health practice. Quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods studies, and gray literature were included without restrictions on language or publication year. Outcomes were synthesized according to follow-up period (short, mid, long term) and ecological level (micro, meso, macro). RESULTS: Thirty studies published between 1990 and 2024 were included. Of them, 14 used qualitative designs, 13 mixed methods, and 3 quantitative methodologies. Short-term evaluations primarily reported individual and organizational changes, whereas mid- and long-term studies demonstrated more complex, multilevel outcomes such as policy development, strengthened community networks, and enhancements to health and social service systems. Across ecological levels, 14 domains of community capacity were identified. CONCLUSION: Public health-related nursing practice contributes to multilayered community capacity building through CHD/CCH. However, gaps remain in quantitative evaluation and standardized outcome measures, underscoring the need for methodological advancement to reinforce the evidence base for community development in public health nursing.
Tanaka et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: