Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Accept all cookies Reject all non-essential cookies

Optimising the Uptake of Physical Activity in UK Social Prescribing

This project explores improving uptake and engagement in UK physical-activity social prescribing, producing evidence and co-created guidance to enhance equity.

A wide shot of two women over 50 exchanging a high-five during an outdoor walking netball training session. Dressed in sporty and warm attire, they celebrate teamwork and fitness, with other participants engaging in the background. The setting reflects the social and active nature of the sport.

Background

Social prescribing connects patients to community-based, non-clinical support. Physical activity is a central offer in UK social prescribing, with strong evidence for preventing and managing long-term conditions. Link workers play a pivotal role in guiding patients to activity-based interventions (ABIs), yet uptake and adherence remain inconsistent. Evidence on referrals, engagement, and dropout is limited, responsibilities are fragmented, and weak feedback systems obscure reasons for disengagement. This thesis examines the critical point from referral to early continuation (up to 12 weeks), generating evidence and co-produced guidance to strengthen uptake and promote equity in physical-activity social prescribing.

Aims

The overarching aim of this research is to generate robust evidence and co-produce practical guidance to optimise the uptake and sustained engagement with physical activity interventions in UK social prescribing.

What the research will entail

The research is structured into four work packages:

Work Package 1: Physical activity in UK social prescribing: a scoping review

  • To systematically identify, describe, and synthesise the evidence on physical-activity-based social prescribing in the UK, assess how it addresses key uncertainties, and highlight knowledge gaps that remain.

Work Packages 2 & 3: Reframing link worker and patient conversations about physical activity

  • Work Package 2: To generate high-quality, evidence-based guidance on implementing physical activity within social prescribing, informing policymakers and clinical guidelines, and supporting link workers to deliver meaningful, evidence-informed conversations that address physical and socioeconomic barriers.
  • Work Package 3: To examine how patient and service-user preconceptions of physical activity change following engagement with activity-based social prescriptions, and to identify the key factors influencing those changes.

Work Package 4: Stakeholder-led solutions for improving engagement and adherence

  • To identify and prioritise barriers and enablers to engagement and adherence in physical-activity-based social prescribing, as experienced by service users, link workers, and providers.
  • To co-design practical, context-appropriate strategies and resources with stakeholders that address these barriers and strengthen referral, onboarding, and retention processes.
  • To develop and refine implementation tools (e.g., referral checklists, onboarding protocols, feedback mechanisms, and monitoring templates) that support link workers and service providers in promoting sustained engagement.

Who might benefit from this project

  • Service-user level: Easier access to physical-activity opportunities, with barriers identified and addressed, particularly for underserved groups.
  • Service level: Improved conversations between link workers and service users so that both feel understood and supported, boosting engagement and adherence.
  • Policy level: Evidence-informed recommendations to guide commissioning and practice.
  • Research/academic level: Greater clarity on evidence gaps and priorities for future investigation