Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32603958›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2020

Community asset participation and social medicine increases qualities of life.

Luke A Munford, Maria Panagioti, Peter Bower, Suzanne M Skevington

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Social prescription for the elderly: a community-based scoping review.Primary health care research & development · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Enhancing the multi-dimensional assessment of quality of life: introducing the WHOQOL-Combi.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Luke A MunfordHealth Organisation, Policy, and Economics Research Team, Centre for Primary Care & Health Services Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Electronic address: luke.munford@manchester.ac.uk.
Maria PanagiotiNIHR School for Primary Care Research, NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Peter BowerNIHR School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care, Division of Population of Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Suzanne M SkevingtonManchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychological Sciences and Mental Health, Coupland 1 Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N015126/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleSocial prescribing to community assets, like social groups, is a current policy goal. As aging adults lead longer, healthier lives, the effects of participating in community assets raises questions about whether subjective quality of life (QoL) improves during participation and on what dimensions.

objectiveThe study's goal was to examine the effectiveness of community assets at improving QoL among older people living in the community.

methodExamining longitudinal survey data which tracked health and wellbeing in older adults living in Salford, UK over 12 months, we first used regressions on community assets to compare the World Health Organization's QoL Assessment (WHOQOL-BREF) domains at baseline for those who already participated in community assets (54%) and with non-participants (46%). Second, we used propensity score matching to compare QoL in an 'uptake' group (no initial participation but who participated at 12 months), to those who never participated, and to a 'cessation' group who participated initially, but ceased within one year, to those who always participated.

resultsGroup comparisons confirmed that participants reported significantly higher QoL on all domains - environmental, psychological, physical, and social QoL - and on 16 predicted facets. After affirming group matching reliability, the strongest results were for the uptake group, with significant improvements in all domains, and in 18 facets. All QoL domains decreased in the cessation group, but overall, the effect was weaker. As predicted from the context, QoL relating to 'opportunities for recreation and leisure' showed the greatest effect. Furthermore, QoL increased with uptake, and decreased with cessation.

conclusionPolicies to improve QoL in later life should be designed not just to promote community assets, but also maintain participation once initiated.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationQuality of LifeSocial MedicineAgedAged, 80 and overHealth StatusHumansReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesCommunity assetsElderlyQuality of lifeSocial cohesionSocial participationWHOQOL-BREF

Identifiers

PMID32603958
PMCPMC7397510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.