Objectives To examine the use of process mapping (PM) in clinical healthcare settings in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs). Methods A scoping review was conducted. Full-text empirical studies published from 2014 to 2024 were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases. Results Twenty-six articles were included. Deductive and inductive content analysis was performed. Applications have included process- and quality-improvement initiatives (n = 12), health system process analysis and assessment (n = 7), health systems tools design, implementation and evaluation (n = 4), and costing (n = 3). Observations, workshops and interviews were applied, with 65% using a single method (n = 17). PM was predominantly researcher-led (n = 17), with local healthcare workers participating in the majority of studies (n = 21); none involved patients. Gaps in reporting and documentation of PM activities were identified (n = 16). Conclusion PM demonstrated significant potential as a versatile and adaptable method for improving clinical processes. Future PM studies should adhere to reporting guidelines, promote locally led PM activities and incorporate diverse perspectives, particularly those of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boegli et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: