Evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing.
XGBSHN5023 Personalised Care and Social Prescribing
Literature Review
Short introduction to the task:
Evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing.
Draw conclusions that are analysed on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing.
Do ensure you read widely and use academic sources to gain a balanced literature review
WEIGHTING: 60%
WORD COUNT: 2500 WORDS
Key Resources:
Ahluwalia, S. Spicer, J. Storey, K. (Eds) (2020) Collaborative practice in primary and community care. London: Routledge.
Foster, A., Thompson, J., Holding, E., Ariss, S., Mukuria, C., Jacques, R., Akparido, R., & Haywood, A. (2021). Impact of social prescribing to address loneliness: A mixed methods evaluation of a national social prescribing programme. Health & Social Care in the Community, 29(5), 1439–1449. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13200
Hopkins, G., Winrow, E., Davies, C., & Seddon, D. (2023). Beyond social prescribing-The use of social return on investment (SROI) analysis in integrated health and social care interventions in England and Wales: A protocol for a systematic review. PloS One, 18(2), e0277386–e0277386. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277386
McCormack, B. et al (Eds) (2021) Fundamentals of person-centred healthcare practice: a guide for healthcare students. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley.
Nowak, D. A., & Mulligan, K. (2021). Social prescribing: A call to action. Canadian Family Physician, 67(2), 88–91. https://doi.org/10.46747/cfp.670288
Penn, C, and Watermeyer, J. (2018) Communicating across cultures and languages in the health care setting: voices of care. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.
Wakefield, J. R. H., Kellezi, B., Stevenson, C., McNamara, N., Bowe, M., Wilson, I., Halder, M. M., & Mair, E. (2022). Social Prescribing as ‘Social Cure’: A longitudinal study of the health benefits of social connectedness within a Social Prescribing pathway. Journal of Health Psychology, 27(2), 386–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320944991
Journals
Community Practitioner
Health and Social Care in the Community
Journal of Community Health
Journal of Public Health
Websites
www.socialprescribingnetwork.com/
The National Academy for Social Prescribing | NASP (socialprescribingacademy.org.uk)
www.england.nhs.uk/personalisedcare/social-prescribing/
www.culturehealthandwellbeing.org.uk/resources/social-prescribing
Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence.
Please add one of the following statements at the end of your work.
Either:
- This assignment used generative AI in the following ways for the purposes of completing the assignment (choose 1 to 5 of the following): brainstorming, research, planning, feedback, editing.
Or:
- This assignment did not use generative AI for the purposes of completing the assignment.
General advice
- Use appropriate academic language and terminology.
- Correct referencing style in the text and reference list.
- Proofread!
Assessment 2 – Extended Guidance – Literature Review 2500 words
Suggestion.
Introduction 250 words
Main Body 2000 words
Conclusion 250 words
You will conduct a Literature Review based upon the criteria below, also ensuring you pay attention to the grading grid. Do ensure you read widely and use academic sources to gain a balanced literature review, there will be sessions in class that cover the structure, how to use critique and also how to research using databases.
|
L5 Assessment Criteria |
Main Themes to be included |
|
Evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing (40%) Draw conclusions that are analysed on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. (40%) |
The key here is to evaluate the appropriateness of the following, using literature-based evidence: Assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing do this generally at first using literature and research as your basis. Then considering 3 key groups analyse and conclude to show the level of support for the following:
|
|
Sources and Evidence (10%) Adherence to Referencing Conventions, Technical Skills (10%) |
Do ensure you reference in text and a reference list at the end in APA 7. Ensure the literature review is logical and has a good structure, you may use subheadings for a literature review if you wish. These will be included in the word count. |
|
SHN5023 – Social Prescribing – Assessment 2 – Literature Review Weigh 60% |
||||||||
|
Classification:
Criterion: |
Exceptional 1st 100, 95, 92 |
Outstanding 1st 88, 85, 82 |
1st 78, 75, 72 |
2.1 68, 65, 62 |
2.2 58, 55, 52 |
3 48, 45, 42 |
Fail 38, 35, 32 |
Abject Fail 25, 20, 10, 0 |
|
Evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing (40%) |
Polished Grasp, showing an astute approach to the evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
Comprehensive and confident approach to the evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
Thorough understanding evident and well applied to the evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
Secure, general understanding and reasonable evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
Sound knowledge relevant to the evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
Limited knowledge shows basic evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
Faulty understanding shown in the evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
No understanding within the evaluation of the appropriateness of different approaches to assessing, planning and evaluating personalised care and social prescribing to support individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing |
|
Draw conclusions that are analysed on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. (40%) |
Original and searching analysis, critical appraisal of task and judicious conclusions drawn on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
Searching analysis with pertinent conclusions drawn on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
Insightful analysis throughout with appropriate conclusions Drawn on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
Strong analysis of salient illustrative examples. Some general conclusions Drawn on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
Some conclusions drawn based on some reasonable comparisons and Examples drawn on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
Basic analysis. Remains descriptive, little evaluation or comparison. Few clear Conclusions drawn on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
Insufficient evaluation or attempt to make comparisons. Conclusions illogical Insufficient on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
No evaluation or attempt to make comparisons. Conclusions illogical or Absent on the level of support that these approaches provide for individuals, families and community`s health and wellbeing. |
|
Sources and Evidence (10%) |
Exceptionally good reference to and application of a wide range of relevant reading from a variety of sources and research informed literature. |
Outstanding reference to and application of a wide range of relevant reading from a variety of sources and research informed literature. |
Excellent reference to and application of a wide range of relevant reading from a variety of sources and research informed literature. |
Very good engagement with a wide range of relevant reading and variety of sources and research informed literature. |
Good engagement with an appropriate range of reading beyond essential texts. |
Evidence of reading, largely confined to essential texts, but mainly reliant on taught elements. |
Poor engagement with essential texts and no evidence of wider reading. Heavily reliant on taught elements. |
No evidence of reading or engagement with taught elements. |
|
Adherence to Referencing Conventions, Technical Skills (10%)
|
Flawless application of APA referencing. Exceptional demonstration of subject specific skills and practices. |
Flawless application of APA referencing. Outstanding demonstration of subject specific skills and practices. |
Flawless application of APA referencing. Excellent demonstration of subject specific skills and practices. |
Consistently accurate application of APA referencing, with no inaccuracies or Inconsistencies. Very good demonstration of subject specific skills and practices. |
APA Referencing may show minor inaccuracies or Inconsistencies. Good demonstration of subject specific skills and practices. |
APA Referencing may show inaccuracies and/or inconsistencies. Satisfactory demonstration of subject specific skills and practices. |
Inconsistent and weak use of APA referencing. Unsatisfactory demonstration of subject specific skills and Practices.
|
Absent or incoherent APA referencing. No demonstration of subject specific skills and practices. |
