tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
BMJ Open
. 2025 Mar 12;15(3):e086922.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086922. Prioritising community-defined interventions to address the health and well-being impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on racially minoritised communities in East London: results from an adapted James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership
Vanessa Apea[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Isabelle Whelan[SUP] 3 2 [/SUP], Suzannah Kinsella[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Chloe Orkin[SUP] 3 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Objectives: Racially minoritised communities (RMCs) were disproportionately affected by COVID-19, experiencing among the highest mortality rates of the UK's pandemic. We sought to understand the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health and well-being of RMCs in the ethnically diverse and socioeconomically unequal area of East London, located in the northeastern part of London, England.
Design: Prospective surveys and a consensus meeting following the established James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership (PSP) methodology, adapted for a specific geographic location and ethnic groups.
Setting: Conducted in East London between 2021 and 2023.
Participants: Participants were individuals aged ≥18 years living and/or working in East London. Communities represented included Black African, Black Caribbean, Somali, South Asian and Bangladeshi.
Outcome measure: People were asked to submit suggestions for the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Return responses were reviewed and prioritised in a final workshop.
Results: 816 suggestions were gathered from 187 responses to the initial survey. These were summarised into a longlist of 40 for the second survey, from which 243 respondents identified a shortlist of 26 priorities for discussion in a consensus meeting. The final top 10 priorities cover community-based support and spaces spanning education, social support, mental health and housing.
Conclusion: A systematic methodology was used to identify the priorities of RMCs in East London in the context of recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The breadth of the top 10 reflects how profound the effects of the pandemic have been among these communities. It also demonstrates the capacity of a PSP to articulate diverse community-driven priorities for a topic that was wider than healthcare. The findings could have applications in other disease areas that disproportionately affect RMCs.
Keywords: COVID-19; Community-Based Participatory Research; PUBLIC HEALTH.
. 2025 Mar 12;15(3):e086922.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086922. Prioritising community-defined interventions to address the health and well-being impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on racially minoritised communities in East London: results from an adapted James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership
Vanessa Apea[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Isabelle Whelan[SUP] 3 2 [/SUP], Suzannah Kinsella[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Chloe Orkin[SUP] 3 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 40074269
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086922
Objectives: Racially minoritised communities (RMCs) were disproportionately affected by COVID-19, experiencing among the highest mortality rates of the UK's pandemic. We sought to understand the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health and well-being of RMCs in the ethnically diverse and socioeconomically unequal area of East London, located in the northeastern part of London, England.
Design: Prospective surveys and a consensus meeting following the established James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership (PSP) methodology, adapted for a specific geographic location and ethnic groups.
Setting: Conducted in East London between 2021 and 2023.
Participants: Participants were individuals aged ≥18 years living and/or working in East London. Communities represented included Black African, Black Caribbean, Somali, South Asian and Bangladeshi.
Outcome measure: People were asked to submit suggestions for the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Return responses were reviewed and prioritised in a final workshop.
Results: 816 suggestions were gathered from 187 responses to the initial survey. These were summarised into a longlist of 40 for the second survey, from which 243 respondents identified a shortlist of 26 priorities for discussion in a consensus meeting. The final top 10 priorities cover community-based support and spaces spanning education, social support, mental health and housing.
Conclusion: A systematic methodology was used to identify the priorities of RMCs in East London in the context of recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The breadth of the top 10 reflects how profound the effects of the pandemic have been among these communities. It also demonstrates the capacity of a PSP to articulate diverse community-driven priorities for a topic that was wider than healthcare. The findings could have applications in other disease areas that disproportionately affect RMCs.
Keywords: COVID-19; Community-Based Participatory Research; PUBLIC HEALTH.