ArticleBMC primary care2026
Perspectives of stakeholders in Danish voluntary sports clubs on engaging in potential social prescribing programmes: a qualitative case study.
Article in BMC primary care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPhysical inactivity is a leading risk factor for non-communicable diseases and mortality in Europe. Maintaining sufficient levels of physical activity is often hindered by barriers beyond the individual level, such as socioeconomic factors and community conditions. One promising approach to address these barriers is social prescribing, which connects patients to community resources to address broader determinants of health, foster social relationships and enhance individuals’ physical and mental health. This current study aims to explore the attitudes and perspectives of stakeholders in Danish voluntary sports clubs regarding social prescribing initiatives that connect physically inactive patients from general practice to community-based physical activity in these clubs.
methodsThe study design was a collective case study, including five Danish voluntary sports clubs. Data were collected through ethnographic observations (approximately 55 h) of diverse physical activities targeting adult participants (+ 18 years) and participants aged 65 years and over; and semi-structured face-to-face focus groups conducted in each case two to six months after the ethnographic observations. In total,18 sports club stakeholders (members, instructors and board members) participated in the focus groups. A thematic analysis of each case, followed by a cross-case analysis, was used to explore the stakeholders’ attitudes and perspectives on social prescribing.
resultsOur sources of data revealed that stakeholders of Danish voluntary sports clubs viewed patients connected by social prescribing as welcome members of their communities if patients engage based on personal interests and responsibility, similar to current members. Stakeholders highlighted that knowledge about patients’ capacity and suitable activity options is needed for successful referral by social prescribing. Concerns were expressed about the unwanted responsibilities that social prescribing may place on voluntary instructors and whether specific qualifications are required, indicating the need for support to accommodate concerns and enhance the confidence of voluntary sports clubs in social prescribing.
conclusionsOur findings emphasise the potential importance of aligning social prescribing patients with community activities according to their motivation and capacity while also considering community providers’ resources and culture. A community-level approach addressing concerns and barriers among stakeholders in community services may be vital for developing robust social prescribing initiatives involving voluntary sports clubs in Denmark.
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.