We want to understand how social prescribing (being referred to social sources of support, e.g., sports or creative activities) can improve mental health and wellbeing for young people.

We are trying to find out:

a) What are young people’s and other people’s thoughts and preferences on social prescribing?
b) What makes it easier or more difficult for young people to access social prescribing?
c) What are the experiences of taking part in social prescribing?

To find out about this, we are asking different people involved in social prescribing to give us their views. This includes:

• Clinicians
• Link workers
• Organisations involved in social prescribing
• Children and young people aged 13-25

I may be interested, what does it involve?

For young people, we want to know your preferences around how you would like to access these services. This could also be a focus group (talking to a researcher and a group of up to five other young people) or an interview (talking to a researcher on your own).

For clinicians, link workers, organisations involved in social prescribing, and young people, we will ask for your views around the barriers and facilitators to social prescribing for children and young people to improve mental health and wellbeing. This will be in a one on one interview.

Do I have to take part?
No, you do not have to take part, even if you have asked for more information.

Are there any benefits to taking part?
Telling us your views may help us improve services in the future. We can also provide you with a £10 voucher for your time.

This study has been approved by UCL ethics committee [Ref: 6386/002]. This project will abide by all Data Protection and GDPR legislation.

You can also read our privacy notice.


  • To evaluate the outcomes of PIP versus routine care for maternal mental health
  • To evaluate the outcomes of PIP versus routine care for infant development
  • To evaluate the outcomes of PIP versus routine care for the parent-infant relationship

Mother-infant dyads were referred by health and social care professionals from a number of inner city London sites. Participants were randomly allocated to either the treatment group, being offered weekly sessions of ‘Parent-Infant Psychotherapy’, or the control group, receiving routine care.

Mother-infant dyads were assessed at three time points (baseline, 6 month and 12 month follow up) using a standardised battery of outcome measures looking at maternal variables, infant variables and the parent-infant relationship.


References/ Publications

  • Baradon, T., Broughton, C., Gibbs, I., James, J., Joyce, A., & Woodhead, J. (2005). The Practice of Psychoanalytic Parent Infant Psychotherapy: Claiming the Baby. Routledge.

Our use of cookies

We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We’d also like to set optional analytics to help us improve it. We won’t set optional cookies unless you enable them. Using this tool will set a cookie on your device to remember your preferences.

For more detailed information about the cookies we use, see our Cookies page

Necessary cookies

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. You may disable these by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Analytics cookies

We’d like to set non-essential cookies, such as Google Analytics, to help us to improve our website by collecting and reporting information on how you use it. The cookies collect information in a way that does not directly identify anyone. For more information on how these cookies work, please see our Cookies page. If you are 16 or under, please ask a parent or carer for consent before accepting.