Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHusk, Ken
dc.contributor.authorElston, Jen
dc.contributor.authorGradinger, Fen
dc.contributor.authorCallaghan, Len
dc.contributor.authorAsthana, Sen

Social prescribing is the topic of the moment. Many national organisations and individuals from policy, practice, and academia (such as NHS England, the RCGP, the Mayor of London, and National Institute for Health Research) are rightly advocating social prescriptions as an important way to expand the options available for GPs and other community-based practitioners to provide individualised care for people’s physical and mental health through social interventions. No robust figures exist but it is thought that around 20% of patients consult their GP for primarily social issues, given this and the driving forces of an ageing population, increased complex health and social needs, and increasing demand on services, social prescribing is rapidly gaining popularity.As a concept and a model for delivering health and social interventions, social prescribing has proliferated without a concomitant evidence base.1 This is partly due to resource limitations on evaluators and partly due to difficulties in conceptualising what social prescribing is and what good evidence for a complex service might look like. Here, we briefly outline different models of social prescribing, the current evidence base and its limitations, explore problems relating to what constitutes good evidence, and discuss some potential ways forward.An immediate difficulty is the range of activity that the term ‘social prescribing’ embraces. Such heterogeneity is a function of social prescribing being the demand-driven formalisation of referrals to existing community services and organisations, which is necessarily locally different. More generally, at one extreme there are narrow interventions that focus on one clinical area and aim to prevent or reduce progression to chronic disease. Such interventions tend to include targeted life-style interventions (for example physical activity, healthy eating or cooking), medicines management or group mentoring, and are typically accessed through the healthcare system. At the other extreme, a large number of schemes are …

dc.format.extent6 - 7en
dc.publisherRoyal College of General Practitionersen
dc.titleSocial prescribing: where is the evidence? Commissioned editorialen
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.journalBritish Journal of General Practiceen
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA20 Social Work and Social Policy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CCT&PS
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot knownen
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV