Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32708127›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Social Return on Investment Analysis of the Health Precinct Community Hub for Chronic Conditions.

Carys Jones, Ned Hartfiel, Paul Brocklehurst, Mary Lynch, Rhiannon Tudor Edwards

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Outcomes and instruments used in social prescribing: a modified umbrella review.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2024
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carys JonesCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2PZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6159-1842
Ned HartfielCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2PZ, UK.
Paul BrocklehurstNorth Wales Organisation for Randomised Trials in Health, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2PZ, UK.
Mary LynchCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2PZ, UK.
Rhiannon Tudor EdwardsCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2PZ, UK.
Bangor University · GB

Funding

HCRW_ SC-16-1223
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Local governments and Health Boards are seeking to develop integrated services to promote well-being. Social participation and physical activity are key in promoting well-being for older people. The Health Precinct is a community hub in North Wales that people with chronic conditions are referred to through social prescribing. To improve community-based assets there is a need to understand and evidence the social value they generate. Data collection took place October 2017-September 2019. Social Return on Investment (SROI) analysis was used to evaluate the Health Precinct. Stakeholders included participants aged 55+, participants' families, staff, the National Health Service and local government. Participants' health and well-being data were collected upon referral and four months later using the EQ-5D-5L, Campaign to End Loneliness Scale and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Family members completed questionnaires at four months. Baseline data were collected for 159 participants. Follow-up data were available for 66 participants and 38 family members. The value of inputs was £55,389 (attendance fees, staffing, equipment, overheads), and the value of resulting benefits was £281,010; leading to a base case SROI ratio of £5.07 of social value generated for every £1 invested. Sensitivity analysis yielded estimates of between 2.60:1 and 5.16:1.

Indexed as

InvestmentsSocial ParticipationState MedicineAgedAged, 80 and overChronic DiseaseCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareExerciseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProgram EvaluationWalesphysical activitysocial prescribingSocial Return on Investment (SROI)

Identifiers

PMID32708127
PMCPMC7399792
OpenAlexW3045205552

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.