Exploration of Evaluation Practices in Social Prescribing Services in Ireland: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

National health services in Ireland and the UK fund the majority of social prescribing services and have issued recommendations for evaluation. However, it is not known what outcomes are prioritised for evaluation within individual services and what evaluation methods are used to capture recommended outcomes. A survey was carried out to examine evaluation practices of social prescribing services on the island of Ireland. This study used a cross-sectional observational design. The sample was all the staff involved in delivering and/or managing SP services on the island of Ireland. Questionnaires were distributed at a national SP conference and online. Closed-response questions were analysed using descriptive statistics. Content analysis was used for open-ended questions. Eighty-four usable surveys were returned (50% from the Republic of Ireland and 50% from Northern Ireland). All respondents (100%) agreed on the importance of measuring SP outcomes. The most frequently measured outcomes were health and well-being (89.2%) and loneliness (84%). The least frequently measured outcome was the satisfaction of healthcare professionals referring to SP: 78.4% of respondents never measured this outcome. The most frequently used measurement tool was the Short Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale, with 38/76 (50%) respondents using this measure. There was a lack of standardised measures identified for some outcomes. For example, 70% of respondents reported always measuring physical activity (PA), but only four respondents identified a specific PA measure. In open-ended questions, respondents recommended flexibility in evaluation methods to reflect the complexity and individualised focus of SP. They also identified the need for protected time to complete evaluations and recommended a national strategy to inform priorities in evaluations. This study demonstrates a wide variation on the island of Ireland on how SP services are measuring outcomes, with many outcomes rarely or never measured using standardised measures. Agreement is needed on a core outcome set for social prescribing in order to guide service delivery and evaluations.

Common health assets protocol: a mixed-methods, realist evaluation and economic appraisal of how community-led organisations (CLOs) impact on the health and well-being of people living in deprived areas.

INTRODUCTION: This research investigates how community-led organisations' (CLOs') use of assets-based approaches improves health and well-being, and how that might be different in different contexts. Assets-based approaches involve 'doing with' rather than 'doing to' and bring people in communities together to achieve positive change using their own knowledge, skills and experience. Some studies have shown that such approaches can have a positive effect on health and well-being. However, research is limited, and we know little about which approaches lead to which outcomes and how different contexts might affect success. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using a realist approach, we will work with 15 CLOs based in disadvantaged communities in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. A realist synthesis of review papers, and a policy analysis in different contexts, precedes qualitative interviews and workshops with stakeholders, to find out how CLOs' programmes work and identify existing data. We will explore participants' experiences through: a Q methodology study; participatory photography workshops; qualitative interviews and measure outcomes using a longitudinal survey, with 225 CLO participants, to assess impact for people who connect with the CLOs. An economic analysis will estimate costs and benefits to participants, for different contexts and mechanisms. A 'Lived Experience Panel' of people connected with our CLOs as participants or volunteers, will ensure the appropriateness of the research, interpretation and reporting of findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project, research tools and consent processes have been approved by the Glasgow Caledonian University School of Health and Life Sciences Ethics Committee, and affirmed by Ethics Committees at Bournemouth University, Queen's University Belfast and the University of East London. Common Health Assets does not involve any National Health Service sites, staff or patients.Findings will be presented through social media, project website, blogs, policy briefings, journal articles, conferences and visually in short digital stories, and photographic exhibitions.

Convergent Validity for the Individual Music-Centered Assessment Profile for Neurodevelopmental Disorders.

A significant percentage of music therapists actively provides services to children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). There is an absence, however, of a widely accepted clinical instrument, specific to music therapy work with this population, that demonstrates psychometric validation. Establishing commonality in assessing and documenting this particular work within the field would be pivotal to furthering the efforts which have established music therapy as evidenced-based practice. A study was conducted to explore the convergent validity between the Musical Emotion Assessment Rating Scale (MEARS), which is Scale I of the Individual Music-Centered Assessment Profile of the Neurodevelopmental Disorders (IMCAP-ND) assessment tool, with the Social Affect Scale domains and item variables of the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS). The data revealed statistical significance, thus supporting convergent validity with several specific MEARS scores when compared with the ADOS Social Affect domain score. The current investigation supports the IMCAP-ND's soundness as an assessment tool possessing valid and reliable psychometric properties. The convergent validity between MEARS and ADOS showed positive results in the area of social affect. Implications of this study are related to clinical practice and may impact how music therapists assess children with autism. Furthermore, this study contributes to the growing body of music therapy assessments that have yielded valid and reliable scores used to evaluate core features of ASD (e.g., social affect).