Exploring how and why social prescribing evaluations work: a realist review

被引:14
作者
Elliott, Megan [1 ]
Davies, Mark [1 ]
Davies, Julie [2 ]
Wallace, Carolyn [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ South Wales, Fac Life Sci & Educ, PRIME Ctr Wales, Wales Sch Social Prescribing Res, Pontypridd, M Glam, Wales
[2] Bridgend Cty Borough Council, Valleys Reg Pk, Bridgend, Wales
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2022年 / 12卷 / 04期
关键词
MENTAL HEALTH; PRIMARY CARE; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIAL MEDICINE; STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS; PRIMARY-CARE; GENERAL-PRACTICE; HEALTH RESEARCH; PRESCRIPTION; PEOPLE; IMPACT; ARTS; BENEFITS; SERVICE; MECHANISMS;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057009
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective The evidence base for social prescribing is inconclusive, and evaluations have been criticised for lacking rigour. This realist review sought to understand how and why social prescribing evaluations work or do not work. Findings from this review will contribute to the development of an evidence-based evaluation framework and reporting standards for social prescribing. Design A realist review. Data sources ASSIA, CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus Online, Social Care Online, Web of Science and grey literature. Eligibility criteria Documents reporting on social prescribing evaluations using any methods, published between 1998 and 2020 were included. Documents not reporting findings or lacking detail on methods for data collection and outcomes were excluded. Analysis Included documents were segregated into subcases based on methodology. Data relating to context, mechanisms and outcomes and the programme theory were extracted and context-mechanism-outcome configurations were developed. Meta-inferences were drawn from all subcases to refine the programme theory. Results 83 documents contributed to analysis. Generally, studies lacked in-depth descriptions of the methods and evaluation processes employed. A cyclical process of social prescribing evaluation was identified, involving preparation, conducting the study and interpretation. The analysis found that coproduction, alignment, research agency, sequential mixed-methods design and integration of findings all contributed to the development of an acceptable, high-quality social prescribing evaluation design. Context-mechanism-outcome configurations relating to these themes are reported. Conclusions To develop the social prescribing evidence base and address gaps in our knowledge about the impact of social prescribing and how it works, evaluations must be high quality and acceptable to stakeholders. Development of an evaluation framework and reporting standards drawing on the findings of this realist review will support this aim. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020183065.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 126 条
  • [1] Age Connects Cardiff the Vale, 2017, AG WELL VAL GLAM SEN
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2021, Wales School for Social Prescribing Research website
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2016, REP ANN SOC PRESCR N
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2019, The NHS Long Term Plan
  • [5] Unpacking Black Boxes: Mechanisms and Theory Building in Evaluation
    Astbury, Brad
    Leeuw, Frans L.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2010, 31 (03) : 363 - 381
  • [6] A realist evaluation of social prescribing: an exploration into the context and mechanisms underpinning a pathway linking primary care with the voluntary sector
    Bertotti, Marcello
    Frostick, Caroline
    Hutt, Patrick
    Sohanpal, Ratna
    Carnes, Dawn
    [J]. PRIMARY HEALTH CARE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 2018, 19 (03) : 232 - 245
  • [7] Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence
    Bickerdike, Liz
    Booth, Alison
    Wilson, Paul M.
    Farley, Kate
    Wright, Kath
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (04):
  • [8] General practice referral of 'at risk' populations to community leisure services: applying the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the impact of a community-based physical activity programme for inactive adults with long-term conditions
    Bird, E. L.
    Biddle, M. S. Y.
    Powell, J. E.
    [J]. BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2019, 19 (01)
  • [9] The Cooksey review of UK health research funding - The art of being all things to all people
    Black, Nick
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2006, 333 (7581): : 1231 - 1232
  • [10] A Systematic Review of the Impact of Patient and Public Involvement on Service Users, Researchers and Communities
    Brett, Jo
    Staniszewska, Sophie
    Mockford, Carole
    Herron-Marx, Sandra
    Hughes, John
    Tysall, Colin
    Suleman, Rashida
    [J]. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2014, 7 (04) : 387 - 395