Identifying social prescribing core outcomes using a Delphi approach: findings and future directions.

Seven outcomes met the 'critical' threshold after two rounds of Delphi surveys assessing social prescribing outcomes.

• Participants rated 21 outcomes on a 9-point scale as 'critical' (7–9), 'important but not critical' (4–6), or 'not important' (1–3).
• Seven outcomes were classified as critical; no outcomes were excluded entirely.
• Critical outcomes focused on mental health, physical and social functioning, and wellbeing.
• Ratings between rounds were 'generally consistent.'

Round 1 of the Delphi survey was completed by 74 participants from 10 user groups, and Round 2 by 52 participants from eight user groups.

• Retention rate between rounds was 70%.
• User groups included people who could be affected by social prescribing (e.g., adults ≥ 60 years) and those who can affect it (e.g., providers, researchers).
• The study focused on Canadian perspectives.
• A subgroup description of findings from older adult/family and friend perspectives was provided separately.

Participants provided qualitative comments highlighting environmental and equity factors relevant to social prescribing outcomes.

• Environmental factors commented on included resources and care delivery.
• Equity factors were also raised by participants.
• These contextual factors were noted as potentially influencing outcomes but were not part of the core outcome set itself.

This study represents the first iteration of a social prescribing core outcome set, which the authors note may change over time.

• No prior Delphi studies had determined which outcomes are critical to assess in social prescribing.
• The authors state that 'identification of outcomes is a continuous process, requiring regular updates as results may change due to the ongoing evolution of social prescribing and other factors.'
• Future investigations are recommended to examine how contextual and personal factors might influence outcomes.
• Future work should also identify specific instruments (e.g., questionnaires, performance-based tests) to assess each critical outcome.

The Delphi study followed standard guidelines for Delphi methodology and was conducted as a two-round online survey.

• The survey was developed following 'standard guidelines for Delphi studies.'
• The survey was administered online.
• The study included a diverse range of user groups to capture perspectives of those affected by and those who can affect social prescribing.
• A Canadian focus was maintained throughout the study design.