We need better evidence for social prescribing: call for action for better systems for collaboration and building evidence
N Howlett, K Brown, I Freethy, SW Mercer, G Özakıncı

TL;DR
This paper argues for stronger evidence and collaboration to improve social prescribing practices.
Contribution
It highlights the need for better systems to evaluate and define social prescribing.
Findings
Current data on social prescribing is insufficient for robust evaluation.
Collaboration among stakeholders is essential to build a stronger evidence base.
Clear definitions and standardized approaches are needed for effective implementation.
Abstract
This opinion piece details the challenges associated with defining and evaluating social prescribing. It explores the types of data and considerations needed to produce a more robust evidence base in this area, concluding with a call to action for better collaboration and evidence building from a range of stakeholders.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsArt Therapy and Mental Health · Music Therapy and Health · Psychodrama and Leishmaniasis Studies
