ArticleBMC primary care2025
Social prescribing for informal carers: a pre-post study.
Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of social engagement and support in the association between combined caregiver-cancer survivor status and depressive symptoms.The Gerontologist · 2026Article
- A Health Navigator intervention to address the health-related social needs of caregivers of hospitalised children in an Australian inpatient setting: a mixed-methods feasibility study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- The moderating role of care duration in the relationship between caregiving competence and burden among family caregivers in hospice care.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Abandonment or overreach: the ethical failures of health and social systems and the need for contributory reciprocity.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Models, implementation, and reported outcomes of social prescribing interventions: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInformal carers often experience compromised mental and physical wellbeing due to their caring responsibilities. While social prescribing shows promise in supporting various populations, evidence for its effectiveness in supporting carers is limited. This study assessed the impact of a social prescribing program on health-related quality of life and other wellbeing measures among Australian adult carers.
methodsAnalysis of de-identified data was conducted using pre- and post-intervention measures from two social prescribing programs in New South Wales, Australia (December 2021-August 2024). Participants were adults who self-presented or were referred by their GP for either mental ill-health or chronic disease management. Of 821 eligible participants, 93 (11.3%) were identified as carers based on their social prescriptions and case note review. The intervention involved link workers co-designing individualised plans with participants over 12 weeks, providing referrals to community services and supports. Outcomes included quality of life, mental wellbeing, self-reported health, psychological distress, and healthcare utilisation. Statistical analysis included paired t-tests for pre-post comparisons.
resultsCarers received significantly more social prescriptions than non-carers (mean difference = 2.05, p = .002), particularly in mental and emotional wellbeing (54%) and physical wellbeing (45%) domains. Following the intervention, carers showed significant improvements in quality of life (p < .001), mental wellbeing (p < .001), self-reported health (p < .001), and psychological distress (p < .001). GP visits reduced significantly (p = .002), while hospital visits showed non-significant reductions. Link workers primarily engaged with carers via phone (98%), followed by internet (80%) and face-to-face (67%) contact.
conclusionsSocial prescribing appears to be an effective intervention for supporting carers’ wellbeing and reducing healthcare utilisation. The high uptake of phone-based support suggests potential for scalable remote delivery. Future research with larger samples is needed to examine program benefits across diverse demographic groups and varying intensities of caring responsibilities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.