Mental health benefits of social prescribing in the general population and among people with mental disorders: an umbrella review

Abstract

Social prescribing (SP) aims to connect patients to non-medical community resources to address social determinants of health. Here, we aimed to review the evidence of SP’s effects for mental health in the general population and among patients with mental disorders. We conducted a systematic umbrella review (PROSPERO CRD42025646338) and narrative synthesis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between January 2010 and December 2024. We included reviews of adults not selected based on a diagnosed mental disorder and adults living with mental disorders, and extracted mental-health-related outcomes. Searches were performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection and data extraction; the methodological quality of included reviews was appraised using a modified AMSTAR-2 approach. Thirty-one reviews met inclusion criteria. In the general population, most reviews, particularly those of high or moderate quality, suggested small to moderate improvements in depressive and anxiety symptoms, subjective well-being, social connectedness, and physical activity, especially in multi-component, group-based programs lasting at least 12 weeks and supported by link workers. Among individuals with mental disorders, results pointed to symptomatic improvement, though effect sizes were more variable and often derived from lower-quality (e.g., pre–post or non-randomized) designs. Overall, the most consistent benefits were reported for person-centered, community-anchored interventions. However, the highest-quality evidence (RCTs with active comparators) showed smaller or null effects, and high-level evidence for any single intervention remained scarce. Evidence synthesis and generalizability were limited by heterogeneity in interventions and populations, predominant use of self-reported outcomes, short follow-up periods, and an overrepresentation of British studies. Social prescribing and related community-based interventions may be associated with improvements in mental health and social outcomes. However, confidence in these findings is limited by substantial heterogeneity, the predominance of uncontrolled studies, short follow-up periods, and scarce evidence from trials with credible active comparators. No intervention category was supported by high-certainty evidence of sustained effectiveness. Future research should prioritize adequately powered randomized trials with appropriate comparators, longer follow-up, standardized outcomes, analyses of active components, equity impacts, and full economic evaluations across diverse cultural, social, and health-system contexts.