ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
A taxonomy of children and young people's social prescribing models: a multi-site implementation case study in England.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Social prescribing for children and young people (CYP) is expanding across England, yet there is limited understanding of how local services interpret and configure its core components-individual need, referrer, linking function and community activity-particularly for CYP presenting with mental health difficulties. Methods: Using a multi-site case study design, we examined five CYP-focused social prescribing pathways selected for their diversity of institutional anchors and implementation maturity. Data collection included pathway visualization with site leads and 34 semi-structured interviews with referrers, link workers, managers and practitioners. Thematic analysis was used to compare pathway structures and functions across cases to support development of an empirically grounded taxonomy. Results: Across sites, CYP accessed social prescribing through varied and uneven referral routes, with needs dominated by low-level mental health concerns amid gaps in statutory provision. Link worker roles differed substantially in embeddedness, remit and degree of mental health related support, often extending beyond traditional "linking" models. Pathways showed significant variation in institutional anchor points, eligibility criteria, linking functions and community asset connections. This variability enabled identification of key taxonomy dimensions, including institutional setting, referral pathway configuration, link worker function and community asset integration. Discussion: Findings show that CYP social prescribing is shaped by local context, unmet mental health need and flexible practitioner practice, resulting in diverse models rather than a standardized pathway. These differences have implications for commissioning and evaluation: rather than seeking uniformity, systems should support a 'no wrong-door' approach and relational work, and evaluative approaches should prioritize implementation focused evidence over linear pre-post outcome measurement.
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.