Suppr超能文献

文献中提到的“社会处方”是什么意思?运用话语分析的批判性回顾。

What does the literature mean by social prescribing? A critical review using discourse analysis.

机构信息

Centre for Primary Care and Mental Health, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

Bromley-by-Bow Health Partnership, XX Place Health Centre, Mile End Hospital, London, UK.

出版信息

Sociol Health Illn. 2022 Apr;44(4-5):848-868. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.13468. Epub 2022 Apr 11.

Abstract

Social prescribing (SP) seeks to enhance the role of the voluntary and community sector in addressing patients' complex needs in primary care. Using discourse analysis, this review investigates how SP is framed in the scientific literature and explores its consequences for service delivery. Theory driven searches identified 89 academic articles and grey literature that included both qualitative and quantitative evidence. Across the literature three main discourses were identified. The first one emphasised increasing social inequalities behind escalating health problems and presented SP as a response to the social determinants of health. The second one problematised people's increasing use of health services and depicted SP as a means of enhancing self-care. The third one stressed the dearth of human and relational dimensions in general practice and claimed that SP could restore personalised care. Discourses circulated unevenly in the scientific literature, conditioned by a wider political rationality which emphasised individual responsibility and framed SP as 'solution' to complex and contentious problems. Critically, this contributed to an oversimplification of the realities of the problems being addressed and the delivery of SP. We propose an alternative 'care-based' framing of SP which prioritises (and evaluates) holistic, sustained and accessible practices within strengthened primary care systems.

摘要

社会处方(SP)旨在增强志愿和社区部门在满足初级保健患者复杂需求方面的作用。本研究采用话语分析,调查了 SP 在科学文献中的框架结构,并探讨了其对服务提供的影响。理论驱动的搜索确定了 89 篇学术文章和灰色文献,其中包括定性和定量证据。在文献中,确定了三个主要的论述。第一个论述强调了日益加剧的健康问题背后不断扩大的社会不平等,并将 SP 视为对健康决定因素的回应。第二个论述对人们日益增加的卫生服务利用提出了质疑,并将 SP 描绘为增强自我保健的一种手段。第三个论述强调了一般实践中人类和人际关系维度的匮乏,并声称 SP 可以恢复个性化护理。论述在科学文献中的传播不均衡,受到更广泛的政治理性的影响,这种理性强调个人责任,并将 SP 框定为解决复杂和有争议问题的“解决方案”。至关重要的是,这导致了对所解决问题的现实和 SP 交付的过度简化。我们提出了一种替代的“以关怀为基础”的 SP 框架,该框架优先考虑(和评估)在强化的初级保健系统内的整体、持续和可及的实践。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2a75/9321825/1efce619fe57/SHIL-44-848-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验