Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37881458›Full record

ArticleNIHR open research2023

The feasibility of identifying health inequalities in social prescribing referrals and declines using primary care patient records.

Koser Khan, Rachel Al-Izzi, Alexander Montasem, Clare Gordon, Heather Brown, Joanna Goldthorpe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NIHR open research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. A Thematic Synthesis of the Experiences of Social Prescribing Among Patients in the UK.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  12. Green Social Prescribing in Practice: A Case Study of Walsall, UK.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Koser Khan *Senior Research Associate, NIHR Applied Research Collaboration NWC, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0473-6552
Rachel Al-Izzi *PhD student, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, PR1 2HE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5763-2215
Alexander MontasemSenior Lecturer in Social and Behavioural Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Central Lancashire, Prseton, PR1 2HE, UK.
Clare GordonSenior Research Fellow, Faculty of Health of Care, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, PR1 2HE, UK.
Heather BrownProfessor of Health Inequalities, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0067-991X
Joanna GoldthorpeResearch Fellow NIHR Applied Research Collaboration NWC, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Social prescribing (SP) is part of universal personalised care and available to everyone in the UK National Health Service. However, emerging evidence suggests access disparities in social prescribing. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of using primary care records to access and analyse data on social prescribing. Our secondary aim was to compare characteristics of patients who are offered referral, referred to or decline referral for social prescribing to explore possible inequalities in access to social prescribing. Methods: Patient records (n=3086) were extracted from 11 GP practices across Northwest England for accepted, offered and declined social prescribing referrals. Patient demographics collected included sex, age, ethnicity, mental and physical health diagnoses. Patient characteristics in social prescribing referrals were compared to the overall practice population (practice information from Public Health England). Referral and decline rates were compared by group (e.g. male/female decline rates). Results: GP referral data showed inconsistent recording of wider determinants of health. Patient age, sex and mental and physical health conditions were consistently recorded. Other variables (marital status, interpreter need, education, disability, sexual orientation, non-English language, nationality) were recorded only sporadically and could not be used for analysis. Practices varied in referral patterns. Our preliminary findings identified under-referring of younger age groups and Asians, and higher declined referrals among individuals with physical health diagnoses. Conclusions: Recording discrepancies meant that many patient factors could not be used to identify trends in social prescribing referrals and declines and assess equity. Primary care data recording must be consistent to understand SP referral trends and inequalities relating to the wider determinants of health. Preliminary results suggest some patient groups may be underrepresented in SP referrals, however this requires further investigation.

Indexed as

declineGP referralshealth inequalitiesrepresentationsocial prescribing

Identifiers

PMID37881458
PMCPMC10593349

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.