How is the implementation of empirical research results documented in conflict-affected settings? Findings from a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature.

ABSTRACT: Implementation science scholars argue that knowing 'what works' in public health is insufficient to change practices, without understanding 'how', 'where' and 'why' something works. In the peer reviewed literature on conflict-affected settings, challenges to produce research, make decisions informed by evidence, or deliver services are documented, but what about the understanding of 'how', 'where' and 'why' changes occur? We explored these questions through a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature based on core dimensions of the Extended Normalization Process Theory. We selected papers that provided data on how something might work (who is involved and how?), where (in what organizational arrangements or contexts?) and why (what was done?). We searched the Global Health, Medline, Embas

SUBMITTER: Leresche E 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10464477 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature