ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2026
Organization and implementation of social prescribing in the Western Pacific Region: a scoping review.
Review in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social prescribing for people recovering from treatment for cancer: a systematic scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Models, implementation, and reported outcomes of social prescribing interventions: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Connecting for health: qualitative exploration of community nursing in social prescribing for social determinants of health.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Social prescribing (SP) connects individuals to non-clinical community resources to address social determinants of health (SDH). This review aimed to map and categorise SP models to inform adaptation and implementation across the Western Pacific Region (WPR). Methods: A scoping review was conducted using peer-reviewed databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase) and the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing (IRIS). Grey literature was identified through expert consultations with key stakeholders in WPR countries, informed by the World Health Organization and the International Social Prescribing Collaborative. Data were extracted and categorised by SDH focus, intervention type, delivery mechanism, funding, target population, and implementation challenges. Findings: Fifty-five sources were included (42 peer-reviewed, 13 grey literature), with most studies from Australia (62%), Singapore (10%), and New Zealand (7%). SP models varied in structure, funding, and population reach. Common interventions addressed chronic disease, mental health, and social isolation. Key challenges included limited resources, fragmented referral systems, and a lack of standardised evaluation. Interpretation: Many WPR countries implement SP-like activities, though not always recognised as such. A structured yet flexible SP framework is needed to support scale-up, tailored to local systems and community strengths.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.