Defining advocacy in public health: a scoping review to inform policy, training, and equity-oriented action

Advocacy is widely recognized as a catalyst for equity in health, yet its conceptual foundations, operational forms, and evaluative criteria remain fragmented. In health systems, advocacy is expected to amplify marginalized voices, address structural determinants, and promote participatory governance, but there is limited consensus on its definition and implementation. This scoping review systematically maps how advocacy has been conceptualized, practiced, and evaluated across public health and healthcare domains in democratic societies, with particular attention to its role in advancing equity. We conducted a scoping review across four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL) including peerreviewed literature from health, legal, political, and social domains. Eligible studies explicitly addressed advocacy in health and care contexts, providing conceptual definitions, theoretical frameworks, or descriptions of practice, education, and evaluation. Thematic synthesis was applied to identify recurrent dimensions, strategies, and values. A total of 146 documents were included. Advocacy was consistently framed as a deliberate, value-driven practice oriented toward systemic change, social justice, and equity, despite considerable conceptual and operational variability. Applications spanned clinical care, public health promotion, community mobilization, and policy reform. Relational and communicative skills were widely emphasized as enabling factors, but evaluation remained limited: only 6 studies (4%) reported the use of specific measurement instruments, none of which were standardized. From this synthesis, we developed a preliminary blueprint for equity-oriented public health advocacy, structured around six components: normative grounding; multilevel orientation; relational and communicative practices; critical and systemic literacy; reflexive professionalism and civic agency; and evaluation and accountability mechanisms. Advocacy emerges as both a professional competency and a civic practice essential for equity-driven health systems. This review provides a conceptual foundation and a translational framework to guide integration of advocacy into policy, training, and practice. Sustained collaboration between academia, civil society, and health systems is required to institutionalise advocacy as a driver of just and inclusive health governance. OSF: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MEJHX

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal for Equity in Health
Published
2026-02-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-026-02783-5
Primary Topic
Public Health Policies and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Defining advocacy in public health: a scoping review to inform policy, training, and equity-oriented action

Sarah Bigi, Michela Monaci, Marko Korenjak, Beatrice Credi et al.
International Journal for Equity in Health
Public Health Policies and Education
article

Defining advocacy in public health: a scoping review to inform policy, training, and equity-oriented action

Sarah Bigi, Michela Monaci, Marko Korenjak, Beatrice Credi, Serena Barello
article en

Abstract

Advocacy is widely recognized as a catalyst for equity in health, yet its conceptual foundations, operational forms, and evaluative criteria remain fragmented. In health systems, advocacy is expected to amplify marginalized voices, address structural determinants, and promote participatory governance, but there is limited consensus on its definition and implementation. This scoping review systematically maps how advocacy has been conceptualized, practiced, and evaluated across public health and healthcare domains in democratic societies, with particular attention to its role in advancing equity. We conducted a scoping review across four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL) including peerreviewed literature from health, legal, political, and social domains. Eligible studies explicitly addressed advocacy in health and care contexts, providing conceptual definitions, theoretical frameworks, or descriptions of practice, education, and evaluation. Thematic synthesis was applied to identify recurrent dimensions, strategies, and values. A total of 146 documents were included. Advocacy was consistently framed as a deliberate, value-driven practice oriented toward systemic change, social justice, and equity, despite considerable conceptual and operational variability. Applications spanned clinical care, public health promotion, community mobilization, and policy reform. Relational and communicative skills were widely emphasized as enabling factors, but evaluation remained limited: only 6 studies (4%) reported the use of specific measurement instruments, none of which were standardized. From this synthesis, we developed a preliminary blueprint for equity-oriented public health advocacy, structured around six components: normative grounding; multilevel orientation; relational and communicative practices; critical and systemic literacy; reflexive professionalism and civic agency; and evaluation and accountability mechanisms. Advocacy emerges as both a professional competency and a civic practice essential for equity-driven health systems. This review provides a conceptual foundation and a translational framework to guide integration of advocacy into policy, training, and practice. Sustained collaboration between academia, civil society, and health systems is required to institutionalise advocacy as a driver of just and inclusive health governance. OSF: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MEJHX

International Journal for Equity in HealthVol. 25(1)
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT), University of Pavia (IT), Foundation Center (US), European Faculty of Law (SI), Urology Foundation (GB), European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients Associations (BE), Graduate School of Government and European Studies (SI)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Public Health Policies and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.