TY - JOUR

T1 - Civil society and perilous medicine in Africa

T2 - a systematic review

AU - Gesesew, Hailay

AU - Kebede, Hafte Kahsay

AU - Baum, Fran

AU - Ward, Paul

AU - Musolino, Connie

PY - 2025/6/8

Y1 - 2025/6/8

N2 - Background: Conflict has not been a public health priority for governmental organisations, and evidence on civil society organisation (CSO) contributions to the issue is limited. The present study synthesised the available evidence on the role of CSOs in conflict and health in Africa. Methods: We employed a systematic review using a systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, CINHAL, Web of Science and Scopus for English written articles between 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2023. The four concepts for the search included CSO or non-governmental organisation (NGO), conflict, health and Africa. Results: 14 documents are included in the review. We found that CSOs were engaged in (a) advocacy—CSOs have been advocating to local and national governments, international bodies, and for fund raising; (b) social and medical provision—CSOs have been filling services gaps through delivering medical, health and psychological care and outreach services; (c) material support—CSOs have been providing shelter, food, clothing, and building public infrastructure such as health facilities, roads and water; (d) health diplomacy—CSOs act as Global health diplomats as health is also a key factor in foreign affairs, security and trade policy and (e) accountability—CSOs have been examining the broader role of NGOs or governance. Conclusions: The present systematic review highlights potential areas for future research, emphasising the importance of prioritising key areas for further investigation and suggesting the need for special attention to rarely addressed activities such as health diplomacy given that civil society engagement around healthcare is an important driver of Health For All.

AB - Background: Conflict has not been a public health priority for governmental organisations, and evidence on civil society organisation (CSO) contributions to the issue is limited. The present study synthesised the available evidence on the role of CSOs in conflict and health in Africa. Methods: We employed a systematic review using a systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, CINHAL, Web of Science and Scopus for English written articles between 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2023. The four concepts for the search included CSO or non-governmental organisation (NGO), conflict, health and Africa. Results: 14 documents are included in the review. We found that CSOs were engaged in (a) advocacy—CSOs have been advocating to local and national governments, international bodies, and for fund raising; (b) social and medical provision—CSOs have been filling services gaps through delivering medical, health and psychological care and outreach services; (c) material support—CSOs have been providing shelter, food, clothing, and building public infrastructure such as health facilities, roads and water; (d) health diplomacy—CSOs act as Global health diplomats as health is also a key factor in foreign affairs, security and trade policy and (e) accountability—CSOs have been examining the broader role of NGOs or governance. Conclusions: The present systematic review highlights potential areas for future research, emphasising the importance of prioritising key areas for further investigation and suggesting the need for special attention to rarely addressed activities such as health diplomacy given that civil society engagement around healthcare is an important driver of Health For All.

KW - Systematic review

U2 - 10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018541

DO - 10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018541

M3 - Journal article

VL - 10

JO - BMJ Global Health

JF - BMJ Global Health

SN - 2059-7908

IS - 6

ER -