Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42416138›Full record

ArticleNature health2026

The impact of social prescribing on well-being outcomes in a nationwide analysis.

Feifei Bu, Daniel Hayes, Luke Munford, Daisy Fancourt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Feifei BuSocial Biobehavioural Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2060-3768
Daniel HayesSocial Biobehavioural Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK.
Luke MunfordSchool of Health Sciences, University of Manchester and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4540-6744
Daisy FancourtSocial Biobehavioural Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social prescribing (SP) is growing rapidly in the UK and across the world. However, there remains a lack of robust quantitative evidence on its impacts. Here we aim to provide a large-scale national analysis of the well-being impacts of SP in the UK, drawing pre-post data from large-scale longitudinal administrative records. Well-being outcomes were measured using the short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale and the Office for National Statistics well-being scale, including happiness, anxiety, life satisfaction and sense of life being worthwhile. Data were analysed using Bayesian growth curve modelling. Our findings demonstrate consistent and sizeable improvements across different well-being domains in the 1-6 months following initial referral to SP. Specifically, we observed a 3.31-point increase in the short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (95% highest density interval (HDI) 3.26 to 3.37), a 1.59-point increase in happiness (95% HDI 1.55 to 1.63), a 1.57-point increase in life satisfaction (95% HDI 1.54 to 1.61), a 1.4-point increase in sense of life being worthwhile (95% HDI 1.36 to 1.43) and a 1.45-point decrease in anxiety (95% HDI -1.49 to -1.41). The increase in life satisfaction is equivalent to a conservative monetary estimate of £4,252 over a mean period of 2.5 months (2019 prices), representing a return on investment of £9 (per £1 invested). These results proved robust across multiple sensitivity analyses. We found little evidence that the well-being changes differ across sociodemographic groups, indicating a broad applicability of SP interventions.

Indexed as

Health policyHealth services

Identifiers

PMID42416138
PMCPMC13337486

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.