Social Prescribing Data and Outcome Recording Practices: An Interview‐Based Study Into the Opinions and Experiences of Social Prescribing Stakeholders in the Liverpool City Region, UK

Background: Social prescribing (SP) is a system‐wide approach to reducing health inequalities through nonclinical healthcare interventions. The aim of this study was to explore the practices undertaken and the opinions held by various stakeholders involved in SP in relation to data collection and information utilisation within and between SP programmes/schemes. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with nine stakeholders involved in SP planning and delivery within the Liverpool City Region (LCR), including SP link workers, service managers and commissioners. A deductive thematic analysis approach was used to analyse the transcripts. Results: Three themes were identified pertaining to quantitative data recording, qualitative data recording and the utilisation of data. The interviews revealed considerable variations in systems and consistency of data collection among stakeholders. While some data were collected via existing outcome measurement tools, their adequacy for use within SP in particular was critiqued. Case studies and qualitative feedback (formal and informal) were more frequently used and were felt to be more effective in capturing impact. Strengths of data sharing included the creation of data intelligence to inform more targeted service provision. Knowledge of national guidance pertaining to SP data collection and outcome recording was lacking. Conclusion: Further research on the acceptability of incorporating further SP‐specific indicators within commissioner reporting systems is needed, including formal acknowledgement of qualitative impact reporting on existing, quantitative health inequality indicators or key performance indicators. However, the burden of this on existing structures needs to be assessed. Support for data linkage arrangements and data recording processes, combined with wider routine outcome data recording, can support a targeted approach to increasing the evidence base for SP’s impact on health and wellbeing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health & Social Care in the Community
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1155/hsc/8094184
Primary Topic
Art Therapy and Mental Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Social Prescribing Data and Outcome Recording Practices: An Interview‐Based Study Into the Opinions and Experiences of Social Prescribing Stakeholders in the Liverpool City Region, UK

Fatimah Wobi, Caroline Brett, Tara Kidd, Hannah Timpson et al.
Health & Social Care in the Community
Art Therapy and Mental Health
article

Social Prescribing Data and Outcome Recording Practices: An Interview‐Based Study Into the Opinions and Experiences of Social Prescribing Stakeholders in the Liverpool City Region, UK

Fatimah Wobi, Caroline Brett, Tara Kidd, Hannah Timpson, Rebecca Harrison
article en

Abstract

Background: Social prescribing (SP) is a system‐wide approach to reducing health inequalities through nonclinical healthcare interventions. The aim of this study was to explore the practices undertaken and the opinions held by various stakeholders involved in SP in relation to data collection and information utilisation within and between SP programmes/schemes. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with nine stakeholders involved in SP planning and delivery within the Liverpool City Region (LCR), including SP link workers, service managers and commissioners. A deductive thematic analysis approach was used to analyse the transcripts. Results: Three themes were identified pertaining to quantitative data recording, qualitative data recording and the utilisation of data. The interviews revealed considerable variations in systems and consistency of data collection among stakeholders. While some data were collected via existing outcome measurement tools, their adequacy for use within SP in particular was critiqued. Case studies and qualitative feedback (formal and informal) were more frequently used and were felt to be more effective in capturing impact. Strengths of data sharing included the creation of data intelligence to inform more targeted service provision. Knowledge of national guidance pertaining to SP data collection and outcome recording was lacking. Conclusion: Further research on the acceptability of incorporating further SP‐specific indicators within commissioner reporting systems is needed, including formal acknowledgement of qualitative impact reporting on existing, quantitative health inequality indicators or key performance indicators. However, the burden of this on existing structures needs to be assessed. Support for data linkage arrangements and data recording processes, combined with wider routine outcome data recording, can support a targeted approach to increasing the evidence base for SP’s impact on health and wellbeing.

Health & Social Care in the CommunityVol. 2025(1)
Liverpool John Moores University (GB), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Liverpool John Moores University
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Art Therapy and Mental Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.