From participation to systematization: A scoping review of theoretical frameworks guiding process evaluations in community mental health interventions

Background Process evaluations are essential for understanding how community mental health interventions are implemented and why they succeed or fail. While numerous theoretical frameworks exist to guide such evaluations, the landscape of framework use in mental health contexts remains uncharted, limiting methodological guidance for researchers and practitioners. Methods Scoping review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Systematic searches of three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCOhost) identified 1,143 records, from which process evaluations of community mental health interventions published between 2006 and 2025 were selected. Data extraction captured framework characteristics, study context, and methodological features. Frameworks were inductively categorized into a hierarchical typology based on theoretical orientation and stated function. Results Eighty-three studies met inclusion criteria, employing 54 distinct primary frameworks organized into 14 categories. Implementation science frameworks dominated (39.8%), followed by process evaluation-specific frameworks (8.4%), behavior change theories (8.4%), and participatory approaches (6.0%). A marked temporal shift was observed: participatory and community-based frameworks characterized early publications (23.8% in 2006–2015) but were absent as primary frameworks after 2015, while implementation science frameworks rose from 14.3% to over 50% of studies. Geographic concentration in North America (54.2%) and high-income countries (83.1%) was pronounced. Conclusions The field has undergone a paradigm shift from community-engaged to systematized evaluation approaches. While framework consolidation offers methodological consistency, the decline of participatory approaches raises questions about the role of community voice in evaluation design. We propose a typology to guide framework selection and identify priorities for methodological development in community mental health process evaluation.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-07-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0354732
Primary Topic
Health Policy Implementation Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

From participation to systematization: A scoping review of theoretical frameworks guiding process evaluations in community mental health interventions

Peeter Värnik, Chantal Van Audenhove, Merike Sisask, Rainer Mere
PLoS ONE
Health Policy Implementation Science
article

From participation to systematization: A scoping review of theoretical frameworks guiding process evaluations in community mental health interventions

Peeter Värnik, Chantal Van Audenhove, Merike Sisask, Rainer Mere
article en

Abstract

Background Process evaluations are essential for understanding how community mental health interventions are implemented and why they succeed or fail. While numerous theoretical frameworks exist to guide such evaluations, the landscape of framework use in mental health contexts remains uncharted, limiting methodological guidance for researchers and practitioners. Methods Scoping review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Systematic searches of three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCOhost) identified 1,143 records, from which process evaluations of community mental health interventions published between 2006 and 2025 were selected. Data extraction captured framework characteristics, study context, and methodological features. Frameworks were inductively categorized into a hierarchical typology based on theoretical orientation and stated function. Results Eighty-three studies met inclusion criteria, employing 54 distinct primary frameworks organized into 14 categories. Implementation science frameworks dominated (39.8%), followed by process evaluation-specific frameworks (8.4%), behavior change theories (8.4%), and participatory approaches (6.0%). A marked temporal shift was observed: participatory and community-based frameworks characterized early publications (23.8% in 2006–2015) but were absent as primary frameworks after 2015, while implementation science frameworks rose from 14.3% to over 50% of studies. Geographic concentration in North America (54.2%) and high-income countries (83.1%) was pronounced. Conclusions The field has undergone a paradigm shift from community-engaged to systematized evaluation approaches. While framework consolidation offers methodological consistency, the decline of participatory approaches raises questions about the role of community voice in evaluation design. We propose a typology to guide framework selection and identify priorities for methodological development in community mental health process evaluation.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(7)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Health Policy Implementation Science
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.