Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38101334›Full record

ArticleJournal of health services research & policy2024

What is the best way to evaluate social prescribing? A qualitative feasibility assessment for a national impact evaluation study in England.

Abimbola Ayorinde, Amy Grove, Iman Ghosh, Jenny Harlock, Edward Meehan, Natalie Tyldesley-Marshall, Adam Briggs, Aileen Clarke, Lena Al-Khudairy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health services research & policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Abimbola AyorindeDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4915-5092
Amy GroveDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8027-7274
Iman GhoshDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7073-7468
Jenny HarlockDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2300-750X
Edward MeehanMonash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9340-819X
Natalie Tyldesley-MarshallDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0576-3459
Adam BriggsDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2314-1039
Aileen ClarkeDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8299-3146
Lena Al-KhudairyDivision of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0638-583X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDespite significant investment in social prescribing in England over the last decade, we still do not know if it works, or how models of social prescribing fit within wider health and care policy and practice. This study explores current service delivery structures and assesses the feasibility of a national evaluation of the link worker model.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted between May and September 2020, with 25 key informants from across social prescribing services in England. Participants included link workers, voluntary, community and social enterprise staff, and those involved in policy and decision-making for social prescribing services. Interview and workshop transcripts were analysed thematically, adopting a framework approach.

resultsWe found differences in how services are provided, including by individual link workers, and between organisations and regions. Standards, referral pathways, reporting, and monitoring structures differ or are lacking in voluntary services as compared to clinical services. People can self-refer to a link worker or be referred by a third party, but the lack of standardised processes generated confusion in both public and professional perceptions of the link worker model. We identified challenges in determining the appropriate outcomes and outcome measures needed to assess the impact of the link worker model.

conclusionsThe current varied service delivery structures in England poses major challenges for a national impact evaluation. Any future rigorous evaluation needs to be underpinned with national standardised outcomes and process measures which promote uniform data collection.

Indexed as

Social WelfareSocial WorkEnglandFeasibility StudiesHumansQualitative Researchfeasibilitylink workerqualitativeservice evaluationsocial prescribing

Identifiers

PMID38101334
PMCPMC10910745

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.