Skip to content
Review Open access

Facilitators and barriers to patient and public involvement in developing learning health systems within community health services: ascoping review

Sep 2026 · Research Involvement and Engagement · Vol 12 · 0 citations · 57 references
Medicine

TL;DR

Previous research on how patients and the public are included in improving community health services was looked at, suggesting that community-based LHS development requires sustained investment in trust-building, shared decision-making, inclusive governance, and long-term engagement strategies.

Abstract

Learning Health Systems (LHS) integrate research, clinical expertise, and patient data to continuously improve health care. Although community engagement is central to LHS, existing literature has largely focused on data infrastructure, clinical improvement, and system learning, with limited attention to meaningful patient and public involvement (PPI) in community-based care. This review aimed to identify facilitators and barriers to such involvement in the development of LHS in community health services. We conducted a scoping review in line with the JBI methodology and searched MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Reference lists were searched using forward and backward citation. The date of the last search was August 10, 2026. We excluded studies conducted in acute or hospital settings and conference proceedings. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data using Covidence, and NVivo was used to synthesize the outcomes. We identified 12 studies published between 2017 and 2025, most conducted in the United States (75%). Studies included diverse populations such as older adults, individuals with chronic disease survivors, LGBTQ+ individuals in cancer survivorship care, and stroke survivors. Patient and public involvement ranged from consultation and interviews to partnership and co-design, while shared governance or co-led models were uncommon. Barriers to meaningful involvement included mistrust in healthcare systems, structural inequities, fragmented care pathways, poor communication, limited infrastructure, lack of sustainable engagement support, and power imbalances that contributed to tokenistic participation. Facilitators included trust-building, mutual respect, community partnerships, culturally responsive engagement, co-design approaches, and supportive organizational leadership. Strategies to enhance engagement included care coordination tools, telehealth, inclusive recruitment practices, bidirectional feedback systems, knowledge translation initiatives, and patient and family participation in decision-making and service design. This review highlights that meaningful patient and public involvement in Learning Health Systems depends not only on technical infrastructure, but also on relational, organizational, and structural conditions that support equitable participation. Findings suggest that community-based LHS development requires sustained investment in trust-building, shared decision-making, inclusive governance, and long-term engagement strategies. Future research should examine how participatory approaches influence equity, governance, service improvement, and long-term Learning Health System outcomes. Healthcare services should improve by learning from the people who use them, such as patients, families, caregivers, and community members. Their experiences can help us understand what is working, what is not, and what needs to change. In this article, we looked at previous research on how patients and the public are included in improving community health services. These services include primary care, home and community care, long-term care, and other care outside hospitals. We found that many projects asked patients and community members for their opinions. This often happened through interviews, meetings, or feedback sessions. However, patients and community members were not always included as equal partners in making decisions. Several things made it harder for people to take part. These included lack of trust in healthcare, poor communication, not enough time or money, transportation problems, limited internet or technology, and some people having more power than others. These issues can make it especially hard for people from underserved communities to be involved in shaping the healthcare services that serve them. We also found that involvement worked better when healthcare organizations listened carefully, built trust and meaningful relationships, worked with community groups, and made it easier for people to take part. Overall, this review shows that better healthcare is not just about better data or technology. It is also about listening, sharing power, and building long-term relationships.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Review Open access Sep 2026

Assessing the contextual factors around implementing social needs screening and intervention programs in primary care in the United States: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE To summarize the contextual factors influencing implementation of US-based social needs screening and intervention programs in primary care. METHODS We searched CINAHL, Cochrane, Ovid, PubMed, and Scopus (January 2015-April 2025). Included studies reported on programs using a structured tool to screen adult...

Eva Chang, Iridian Guzman, Nicole Glowacki et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Use of Telehealth Technology in the Delivery of Community Health Services for Children and Young People in New Zealand. A Scoping Review.

AIM To explore what is known about the use of telehealth for delivering community health services to children and young people in New Zealand, this review will map the existing evidence and identify key characteristics, gaps, and opportunities to support equitable service delivery. METHODS A scoping review was conduc...

S. Williams, J. Gardiner, T. W. Barbarich-Unasa et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

From Evidence to Value: Integrating Evidence-Based Medicine, Patient Safety, Quality Improvement, Learning Health Systems, and Value-Based Healthcare.

The historical development and conceptual relationships among EBM, patient safety, QI, LHS, and VBHC are examined, and an integrated framework for understanding their complementary roles in healthcare quality is proposed.

Takehiro Okabayashi, R. Inada, T. Imai et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

International partnerships in health professions education: a scoping review of stakeholder experiences and outcomes

International partnerships in health professions education can enhance access to education and contribute to the development of a globally competent health workforce, but their effectiveness depends on context-sensitive curriculum adaptation, structured institutional support, and collaborative governance and quality as...

Gamarelanbia Yousif, S. Conen, Jo Hart et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Application of frameworks for health technology implementation in primary and secondary care - a mixed methods systematic review

Health technology (tech) has the potential to transform patient outcomes. Frameworks can be used to help guide health tech implementation for improving evidence translation and patient outcomes. Some frameworks for health tech implementation exist, however success remains inconsistent. We synthesised evidence on...

Shraboni Ghosal, E. Kontopantelis · 0 citations
Review Open access Apr 2026

Scoping review protocol: a mobile health solution for the management of stress among health science students at rural universities in South Africa

Stress is prevalent among health science students, particularly in rural settings where access to mental health resources is limited. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions offer a promising avenue for providing accessible support for stress management. This scoping review aims to identify existing mHealth interventions...

Bhekithemba Vellem, Nozuko Glenrose Mangi · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.