@article{discovery10205984,
       publisher = {Wiley},
         journal = {Health \& Social Care in the Community},
           title = {Australian and UK Perspectives on Social Prescribing Implementation Research: Theory, Measurement, Resourcing and Discovery to Ensure Health Equity},
          volume = {2025},
            note = {{\copyright} 2025 Genevieve A. Dingle et al. Health \& Social Care in the Community published by John Wiley \& Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).},
          editor = {Qing-Wei Chen},
          number = {1},
            year = {2025},
          author = {Dingle, Genevieve A and Aggar, Christina and Arslanovski, Nikita and Astell-Burt, Thomas and Baker, JR and Baxter, Ruthanne and Bissett, Michelle and Bowe, Mhairi and Brymer, Eric and Burton, Alexandra and Byng, Richard and Elston, Julian and Fancourt, Daisy and Feng, Xiaoqi and Fino, Emmanuel and Freak-Poli, Rosanne and Harkin, Lydia and Hayes, Daniel and Hazeldine, Emma and Kellezi, Blerina and McNamara, Niamh and Sharman, Leah and Stevenson, Clifford and Wakefield, Juliet and Warran, Katey and Wells, Leanne and Wright, Laura and Zurynski, Yvonne and Husk, Kerryn},
             url = {https://doi.org/10.1155/hsc/2650302},
        abstract = {There has been a rapid increase in the delivery of social prescribing globally in recent years. However, a lack of theoretical framework, the diversity of social prescribing interventions and outcome measures, a lack of ongoing resources to provide services equitably and a lack of coordinated research agenda make it challenging for practitioners to know how best to put social prescribing into practice. This paper summarises perspectives from 29 UK and Australian authors and sets a course for future social prescribing implementation in four key areas: theory, measurement, resourcing and equity, and discovery (big questions on the research agenda). Eight recommendations are made: (1) multilevel or systems theory frameworks should inform programme design and implementation; (2) methods should be developed in collaboration with participants and service providers; (3) a core set of outcome measures should be developed and complemented by framework-specific measures; (4) factors at multiple levels should be included to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the experience and value of social prescribing; (5) funding models should ensure that community sector organisations providing the programmes and services are well supported; (6) social prescribing stakeholders could advocate for equitable funding through dialogue and knowledge translation; (7) future research could focus on understanding barriers and enablers of engagement in social prescribing in marginalised populations; and (8) future research should focus on link workers' and community workers' experiences of social prescribing. Emphasising health equity and asset-based community development, our perspective positions social prescribing not merely as a response to individual health needs but as a catalyst for a broader societal transformation.}
}