Table 3.

Review findings and associated recommendations

Uncovered mechanism	Recommendations
Community members’ agency to contribute meaningfully is realised	Power sharing should be pursued where feasible, welcoming views from as early as possible where the research agenda or intervention focus can still be adjusted.
Shared understanding of the benefits of health promotion	Research or intervention teams should support affected communities in reaching a shared understanding about divisive or stigmatising aspects of health promotion.
Community feels empowered	Research teams should foster a sense of ‘empowerment’ in affected communities with evidence and be available to answer health-related questions and concerns, while emphasising the communities’ own expertise and agency in solving problems affecting them.
Community members feel solidarity and unity	Public health issues should be presented as shared challenges to be addressed together, while avoiding assumptions about ‘communities’ defined by researchers already being cohesive or harmonious entities. Consider partnering with existing groups and self-identifying communities where relevant and possible.
Community members’ agency remains unrealised	Research teams should be realistic and transparent about what can be accommodated, pursuing institutional flexibility where possible (eg, more senior researchers with authority/tenure have more scope to create change).
Participation is driven by financial motives or reputational expectations	Research teams should manage expectations as much as possible, perhaps through cultivating partnerships or relationships where non-academic actors can understand the realities and constraints (eg, reasons for targeting of studies, scope of funding or ethical approval) of academic research. The likely risk of undue inducement needs to be taken particularly seriously whenever engaging with communities experiencing, or with a long history of, structural inequality or any form of oppression. While the rationale for engaging and doing research with disadvantaged communities is typically related to the potential beneficial impact of the research, it cannot be assumed that well-intended research or engagement is never harmful or exploitative.