IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i8p3896-d531989.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review to Examine the Evidence in Developing Social Prescribing Interventions That Apply a Co-Productive, Co-Designed Approach to Improve Well-Being Outcomes in a Community Setting

Author

Listed:
  • Gwenlli Thomas

    (School of Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2EF, UK)

  • Mary Lynch

    (School of Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2EF, UK
    Centre for Health Economics and Medicine Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2PZ, UK)

  • Llinos Haf Spencer

    (Centre for Health Economics and Medicine Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2PZ, UK)

Abstract

This systematic review aims to investigate the evidence in applying a co-design, co-productive approach to develop social prescribing interventions. A growing body of evidence suggests that co-production and co-design are methods that can be applied to engage service users as knowledgeable assets who can contribute to developing sustainable health services. Applying the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted. Peer-reviewed articles were sought using electronic databases, experts and grey literature. The review search concluded with eight observational studies. Quality appraisal methods were influenced by the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Framework approach. A narrative thematic synthesis of the results was conducted. The evidence suggests that a co-design and co-productive social prescribing can lead to positive well-being outcomes among communities. Barriers and facilitators of co-production and co-design approach were also highlighted within the evidence. The evidence within this review confirms that a co-production and co-design would be an effective approach to engage stakeholders in the development and implementation of a SP intervention within a community setting. The evidence also implies that SP initiatives can be enhanced from the outset, by drawing on stakeholder knowledge to design a service that improves health and well-being outcomes for community members.

Suggested Citation

  • Gwenlli Thomas & Mary Lynch & Llinos Haf Spencer, 2021. "A Systematic Review to Examine the Evidence in Developing Social Prescribing Interventions That Apply a Co-Productive, Co-Designed Approach to Improve Well-Being Outcomes in a Community Setting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-17, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:8:p:3896-:d:531989
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/3896/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/3896/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. MacQueen, K.M. & McLellan, E. & Metzger, D.S. & Kegeles, S. & Strauss, R.P. & Scotti, R. & Blanchard, L. & Trotter II, R.T., 2001. "What is community? An evidence-based definition for participatory public health," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 91(12), pages 1929-1938.
    2. Carys Jones & Ned Hartfiel & Paul Brocklehurst & Mary Lynch & Rhiannon Tudor Edwards, 2020. "Social Return on Investment Analysis of the Health Precinct Community Hub for Chronic Conditions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-11, July.
    3. Danny Chesterman & Malcolm Bray, 2018. "Report on some action research in the implementation of social prescription in Crawley. Paths to greater wellbeing: ‘sometimes you have to be in it to get it’," Action Learning: Research and Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 168-181, May.
    4. Pamela Ming Wettasinghe & Wendy Allan & Gail Garvey & Alison Timbery & Sue Hoskins & Madeleine Veinovic & Gail Daylight & Holly A. Mack & Cecilia Minogue & Terrence Donovan & Gerald A. Broe & Kylie Ra, 2020. "Older Aboriginal Australians’ Health Concerns and Preferences for Healthy Ageing Programs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Pedersen, Pia Vivian & Hjelmar, Ulf & Høybye, Mette Terp & Rod, Morten Hulvej, 2017. "Can inequality be tamed through boundary work? A qualitative study of health promotion aimed at reducing health inequalities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 1-8.
    6. Andreia Costa & C Joana Sousa & Paulo Rosário Carvalho Seabra & Ana Virgolino & Osvaldo Santos & Joaquim Lopes & Adriana Henriques & Paulo Nogueira & Violeta Alarcão, 2021. "Effectiveness of Social Prescribing Programs in the Primary Health-Care Context: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, March.
    7. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ayşe Lisa Allison & Abbie Curtis O’Reilly & Alicia Abicht & Danielle Purkiss & Mark Miodownik & Susan Michie & Fabiana Lorencatto, 2024. "Reducing Disposable Diaper Waste: Protocol for a Behavioural Science Workstream," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Llinos Haf Spencer & Mary Lynch & Gwenlli Mair Thomas & Rhiannon Tudor Edwards, 2023. "Intergenerational Deliberations for Long Term Sustainability," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, February.
    3. Melissa Brettell & Clare Fenton & Ethan Foster, 2022. "Linking Leeds: A Social Prescribing Service for Children and Young People," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tila Robinson & Noelle Robertson & Ffion Curtis & Natalie Darko & Ceri R. Jones, 2022. "Examining Psychosocial and Economic Barriers to Green Space Access for Racialised Individuals and Families: A Narrative Literature Review of the Evidence to Date," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-28, December.
    2. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    3. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    4. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    5. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    6. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    7. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    8. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    9. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.
    10. Qing Ye & Bao-Xin Qian & Wei-Li Yin & Feng-Mei Wang & Tao Han, 2016. "Association between the HFE C282Y, H63D Polymorphisms and the Risks of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis o," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    11. Bishal Mohindru & David Turner & Tracey Sach & Diana Bilton & Siobhan Carr & Olga Archangelidi & Arjun Bhadhuri & Jennifer A. Whitty, 2020. "Health State Utility Data in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 13-25, March.
    12. Neal R. Haddaway & Matthew J. Page & Chris C. Pritchard & Luke A. McGuinness, 2022. "PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), June.
    13. Ding Zhu & Mindan Wu & Yuan Cao & Shihua Lin & Nanxia Xuan & Chen Zhu & Wen Li & Huahao Shen, 2018. "Heated humidification did not improve compliance of positive airway pressure and subjective daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Pelai, Ricardo & Hagerman, Shannon M. & Kozak, Robert, 2020. "Biotechnologies in agriculture and forestry: Governance insights from a comparative systematic review of barriers and recommendations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    15. Wesam Salah Alaloul & Muhammad Altaf & Muhammad Ali Musarat & Muhammad Faisal Javed & Amir Mosavi, 2021. "Systematic Review of Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Cost Analysis for Pavement and a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-38, April.
    16. Claudia Peters & Agnessa Kozak & Albert Nienhaus & Anja Schablon, 2020. "Risk of Occupational Latent Tuberculosis Infection among Health Personnel Measured by Interferon-Gamma Release Assays in Low Incidence Countries—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Sehee Kim & Mihyeon Park & Sukhee Ahn, 2022. "The Impact of Antepartum Depression and Postpartum Depression on Exclusive Breastfeeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 31(5), pages 866-880, June.
    18. Habarurema Jean Baptiste & Yan Guang Cai & A. Y. M. Atiquil Islam & Nzabalirwa Wenceslas, 2022. "A Systematic Review of University Social Responsibility in Post-Conflict Societies: The Case of the Great Lakes Region of East Africa," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 439-475, November.
    19. Yafei Shen & Weide Shao, 2022. "Influence of Hybrid Pedagogical Models on Learning Outcomes in Physical Education: A Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-16, August.
    20. Nicola Andreij Rieg & Birgitta Gatersleben & Ian Christie, 2021. "Organizational Change Management for Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Quantitative Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:8:p:3896-:d:531989. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.