Peer Support Groups and Social Prescribing in Viet Nam: Where Could Shared Experience Add Value, and What Safeguards Are Needed?
IMPLEMENTATION & PRACTICEEVIDENCE & EVALUATION
Peer Support Groups and Social Prescribing in Viet Nam: Where Could Shared Experience Add Value, and What Safeguards Are Needed?
Someone living with a long-term health condition attends a community group for the first time. Another member talks about the difficulty of explaining their illness to family members, adjusting everyday routines and maintaining relationships while managing their health. For the first time in months, the newcomer feels that someone understands experiences they have struggled to describe.
Later in the conversation, a participant recommends a supplement and suggests that prescribed medication may no longer be necessary. A few members agree, while others remain silent.
These two moments illustrate both the value and the risks of peer support. Shared experience can offer understanding and encouragement that professional services may not always provide in the same way. But personal experience, however sincerely shared, is not the same as reliable medical evidence.
As interest in social prescribing grows internationally, peer support groups are receiving attention as potential community resources. For Viet Nam, the opportunity deserves consideration. The challenge is to understand what people with lived experience can offer one another while ensuring that participation remains voluntary, personal information is respected and appropriate professional boundaries are maintained.
What makes peer support different?
Peer support involves people using relevant shared experiences to support one another. These experiences may relate to living with a long-term condition, recovering from illness, caring for a family member or adjusting to a significant change in life.
People do not need identical circumstances to support each other. Two individuals living with the same condition may have different symptoms, family responsibilities, financial pressures and personal priorities. What connects them may be their understanding of uncertainty, changing routines or the difficulty of explaining their experiences to others.
One distinctive feature of peer support is reciprocity. Someone may initially join a group hoping to learn from others and later discover that their own experience is useful to another participant. People can contribute as well as receive support, without necessarily being placed into fixed roles of helper and recipient.
NHS England's 2023 peer support guide describes several approaches, including informal and structured groups, individual peer relationships, and online or telephone-based support. It emphasizes shared experience, mutual understanding, inclusion and respect for individual goals.[1]
Some groups are organized by people with lived experience, while others involve community organizations or healthcare partners. Peer supporters may be volunteers or paid workers, depending on the group's purpose and responsibilities.
These arrangements should be distinguished from other activities. A professionally led patient education session may provide useful information without necessarily creating peer support. A general social club may offer friendship without being organized around shared experiences. A therapy group led by a qualified professional operates within a different professional framework.
The distinction matters because different activities involve different responsibilities. Peer support may involve exchanging information, but its particular value lies in relationships built through shared experience and mutual understanding.
Peer support should also not be confused with social prescribing itself. A community group may operate independently for years without any connection to healthcare. It may become a suitable resource within a social prescribing pathway when an individual wishes to participate and the group can respond appropriately to that person's interests and circumstances.
Where could shared experience make a difference?
Healthcare professionals can explain diagnoses, treatment options, warning signs and appropriate self-management. People with lived experience may contribute a different perspective: what it feels like to manage those challenges in everyday life.
Someone living with a long-term condition might appreciate hearing how another person approached a difficult conversation at work, maintained friendships while dealing with fatigue or gradually returned to a familiar activity. A family caregiver may value speaking with someone who understands the practical and emotional demands of supporting a relative.
These conversations cannot establish what treatment is appropriate for an individual. They may, however, provide encouragement and help people consider different ways of responding to everyday challenges.
Sometimes, the most useful part of a group is simply being heard. A participant may not want another explanation of their diagnosis or a list of things they should do. They may want to describe a difficult experience without having to justify why it matters. Hearing that someone else has faced a similar situation can make that conversation easier.
The World Health Organization's 2021 guidance on peer support mental health services emphasizes respect for lived experience, personal choice, autonomy and human rights.[2] Although the guidance focuses on mental health services, these principles offer useful considerations for peer support in other settings.
Respecting personal choice also means accepting that peer support is not suitable for everyone. Some people feel comfortable discussing private experiences in groups, while others prefer individual conversations or activities that are not centered on illness.
Someone may attend a meeting once and decide not to return. That should be regarded as an acceptable choice rather than a failure to participate.
A person should not be expected to join peer support simply because they share a diagnosis or life experience with other members. The value of a group depends partly on whether it offers something the individual genuinely wants.
What does the evidence tell us?
Research provides reasons to explore peer support, but its effectiveness depends on the intervention, participants, setting and outcomes being measured.
It is particularly important to distinguish evidence about peer support interventions from research evaluating complete social prescribing pathways.
A 2026 umbrella review by Abo-Rass and colleagues, published online in the Journal of Mental Health on July 24, examined peer-led group support across physical and mental health conditions.[3]
The authors identified five eligible reviews, with underlying research conducted primarily in the United States and involving mostly adults. Their findings suggested that peer-led groups may support personal recovery and psychosocial outcomes. However, the effects on clinical symptoms remained inconclusive.
The review also identified weaknesses in how interventions were described. Definitions of peer support were inconsistent, implementation details were often incomplete and information about peer facilitator training was limited.
These limitations matter because two interventions described as peer support may operate quite differently. A structured program with trained facilitators, established procedures and professional connections cannot automatically be compared with an informal group meeting occasionally in a community space.
Evidence from Viet Nam also deserves attention.
A randomized controlled trial by Abbasi and colleagues, published in AIDS and Behavior on June 16, 2026, evaluated peer group support among children and adolescents living with HIV in Viet Nam.[4]
The study involved 630 participants aged 10–16 years across five hospitals in four cities. Both groups received standard HIV care, while participants in the intervention group received additional peer support intended to improve treatment adherence.
After 18 months, the researchers found no statistically significant difference in virological failure between the intervention and control groups. The authors discussed several possible explanations, including the already low rate of virological failure and the established care available to participants. Implementation was also affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which shortened the planned intervention.
This study is particularly relevant because it provides research evidence from the Vietnamese healthcare context rather than relying entirely on findings from other countries.
Nevertheless, it examined a specific, structured, healthcare-connected intervention involving children and adolescents receiving HIV treatment. It did not evaluate social prescribing, and its findings should not be generalized to informal community peer groups or other health conditions.
The absence of a statistically significant difference in one clinical outcome also does not establish that participants experienced no other possible benefits from peer support.
Taken together, these studies illustrate why peer support should be evaluated according to what a particular intervention is designed to achieve.
A group may offer meaningful encouragement or opportunities for mutual understanding without demonstrating improvements in clinical outcomes. Equally, a positive experience reported by participants does not establish that the group caused improvements in health or reduced healthcare costs.
Another important consideration is how peer support is organized.
A 2026 scoping review by Chreim and colleagues, published in Social Science & Medicine, examined interpersonal boundaries among formally employed mental health peer support workers.[5]
Drawing on 52 studies, the researchers identified recurring tensions in relationships with service users and professional teams. These findings concern a specific workforce and should not be applied directly to every community group. They nevertheless show why lived experience does not remove the need for clear roles and appropriate organizational support.
For Viet Nam, the available research supports careful exploration rather than assumptions about effectiveness. It does not establish that peer support groups connected through social prescribing will produce predictable clinical, social or economic outcomes across different Vietnamese communities.
A good group needs more than shared experience
People who have experienced similar challenges may understand one another, but they can still have very different expectations about support.
Some participants enjoy open discussion, while others prefer to listen. One person may want practical suggestions, while another may find repeated advice uncomfortable or overwhelming.
Without thoughtful facilitation, a discussion can gradually become dominated by a few confident members. Their experiences may begin to influence what others feel expected to say or do.
For example, someone who has successfully returned to work after an illness may encourage others to follow a similar path. Their story may be valuable, but another participant may have different symptoms, responsibilities or limitations. They should not feel that they have failed simply because their recovery looks different.
A supportive group needs to make room for such differences. Participants should be able to ask questions, disagree respectfully, decline personal questions or remain silent. They should not be pressured to disclose sensitive information or share experiences before they feel comfortable.
Facilitators have an important role in maintaining this environment.
In a peer-led group, a facilitator may have lived experience themselves. However, facilitating involves more than describing personal experiences. It may require welcoming new members, managing discussions, responding to conflict and recognizing when someone needs support beyond what the group can provide.
NHS England's peer support guidance emphasizes the involvement of people with lived experience in developing services, alongside appropriate preparation, mentoring and support for peer leaders.[1]
The level of preparation should reflect the group's purpose and the needs of its participants.
A small informal gathering may require relatively simple expectations about respectful communication and privacy. A structured program involving people with complex support needs may require additional training, supervision and arrangements for obtaining professional assistance.
The objective should not be to make every community gathering operate like a healthcare service. It should be to ensure that people coordinating groups understand their responsibilities and are not expected to manage situations beyond their competence.
When personal experiences become unsafe advice
One of the most important boundaries in health-related peer support concerns the difference between describing an experience and recommending what another person should do.
Someone might explain that they felt better after changing their diet, taking a supplement or stopping a medication. Their account may be sincere, but it does not establish that the same approach would be safe or effective for others.
Problems arise when individual experiences are presented as proof that a treatment works or that professional advice can be ignored.
A person may confidently recommend an unverified product or suggest that another participant reduce prescribed medication. Other members may be reluctant to disagree, particularly if the speaker is respected or has considerable influence within the group.
Peer support groups should not become informal settings for diagnosis, medication adjustment, interpretation of medical investigations or treatment decisions by people who are not appropriately qualified and authorized.
This does not mean participants should be discouraged from describing their healthcare experiences. People may have had positive or negative encounters with healthcare services, and sharing those experiences can help others prepare questions for their own appointments.
However, there is an important difference between listening to someone's story and treating that story as medical advice.
When an unsupported treatment recommendation arises, a facilitator might acknowledge the person's experience while explaining that individual treatment decisions require appropriate professional assessment.
Groups that frequently discuss condition-specific health questions may benefit from an agreed way to obtain reliable information from qualified healthcare professionals. This should support accurate understanding without turning peer facilitators into clinical advisers.
Another boundary concerns situations involving immediate safety.
Someone may disclose serious psychological distress, abuse, thoughts of self-harm or symptoms suggesting an urgent medical problem. Peer facilitators should not be expected to diagnose or independently manage these situations.
They need to understand the limits of the group's role and know how to seek appropriate professional or emergency assistance when necessary. The response should consider the person's immediate safety, the circumstances and applicable legal obligations.
Peer support may help people feel more comfortable asking for help. It should never become a reason to delay essential healthcare, mental health treatment or other professional services.
Privacy and trust within peer support groups
People may share information in a peer group that they would not normally discuss with neighbors, colleagues or even family members.
In a small community, attendance at a particular group may itself reveal sensitive information. Someone might be comfortable speaking about their health during a meeting but strongly object to having their photograph posted on social media or their story repeated elsewhere.
Organizers should establish clear expectations about confidentiality, including respecting other participants' identities, seeking permission before taking photographs or recordings, and not sharing personal messages or experiences without appropriate authorization.
However, an agreement among group members cannot guarantee that every individual will maintain confidentiality. Participants should understand these practical limitations before sharing sensitive information.
Online groups raise additional concerns. Messaging applications may help people stay connected when face-to-face meetings are difficult, but membership lists, profile information, screenshots and forwarded messages can expose personal details beyond the original discussion.
People should not be added to a digital group or have their contact information shared without an appropriate legal basis and any permission required by law.
Vietnamese law also needs to be considered when organizations collect, store, disclose or otherwise process participants' personal information.
The Law on Personal Data Protection No. 91/2025/QH15 and Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP both took effect on January 1, 2026.[6,7]
These instruments establish requirements relevant to personal data processing and protection, including health-related and other sensitive personal information.
Organizations involved in peer support should determine what information is genuinely necessary, the applicable legal basis and consent requirements, how access will be controlled, and how information will be protected and retained.
For example, a community organizer may need a person's name and appropriate contact information to arrange attendance. That does not necessarily justify collecting detailed medical records.
Where a healthcare organization introduces someone to a peer group, the parties should understand what information may lawfully and appropriately be shared and for what purpose.
The practical principle is to respect participants' privacy and control over their information rather than treating group participation as permission for unrestricted disclosure.
Group relationships can create risks that are easy to miss
Not every problem in peer support involves incorrect medical information.
Relationships within groups can become unequal when one person has greater social status, professional authority, financial resources or influence over others.
Someone who established a group may be regarded as its natural leader. Another member may be admired because they have successfully managed a difficult illness or personal challenge.
These experiences may deserve respect, but they do not make someone's opinions appropriate for everyone else. Participants should be able to make their own decisions without feeling obliged to follow the preferences of influential members.
Commercial interests can also create problems.
A participant might begin recommending supplements, paid consultations or other products from which they benefit financially. Because the recommendation comes from someone with a similar experience, it may appear more trustworthy than an ordinary advertisement.
Organizers should consider how promotional activity and conflicts of interest will be handled. A group intended for mutual support should not quietly become a source of commercial leads or a place where members feel pressured to purchase services.
Emotional boundaries deserve similar attention.
Listening repeatedly to experiences of illness, bereavement or distress can be demanding. People with lived experience should not be expected to provide unlimited emotional support simply because they understand what others are facing.
Facilitators may need opportunities for debriefing, appropriate supervision or additional support, depending on the group's activities. They should also be able to step back from their responsibilities when necessary.
A group can appear successful because meetings are well attended while placing considerable pressure on the people who organize them.
A responsible approach should therefore consider the experiences of both participants and facilitators. It should also provide a reasonable way to address complaints, exclusion, inappropriate behavior and interpersonal conflict.
These arrangements need not be unnecessarily complicated. They should be proportionate to the group's purpose and foreseeable risks.
What could Viet Nam learn from existing community networks?
Viet Nam already has community organizations, local associations and informal networks through which people share experiences, maintain relationships and assist one another.
Many of these arrangements were not developed as healthcare interventions and may not describe their activities as peer support. Nevertheless, they provide relevant experience in organizing mutual assistance and community participation.
One example is the Intergenerational Self-Help Club model, known in Vietnamese as Câu lạc bộ Liên thế hệ Tự giúp nhau.
These clubs bring older people and other community members together through activities that may include mutual assistance, healthy ageing, social participation, learning and practical support.
HelpAge International has documented the model as a community-based approach that responds to local needs and draws on the participation of members.[8]
On August 1, 2025, the Vietnamese Government issued Decision No. 1648/QD-TTg approving a program to expand Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs through 2035.[9]
The model offers useful lessons about local leadership, participation and sustaining community activities.
However, these clubs should not automatically be classified as peer support groups in the specific sense used in international healthcare research. Nor does the Government's decision establish them as social prescribing services or mean that every club is suitable for a healthcare-related connection.
The experience is valuable because it demonstrates that organized mutual assistance already has a place in Vietnamese communities.
Other potential resources may include existing groups formed around long-term conditions, shared caregiving experiences or significant life changes. Whether they could participate responsibly in a social prescribing pathway would depend on their actual activities, governance, capacity and willingness to do so.
Local circumstances also shape what people may find acceptable.
Some individuals may prefer the familiarity of people they already know. Others may want a group outside their immediate neighborhood because they are concerned about privacy or stigma.
Work schedules, transportation, language, literacy, disability-related access needs and familiarity with digital communication may influence participation. Family involvement can also be helpful or uncomfortable, depending on the individual. Participants should not automatically be expected to bring relatives or disclose private information to family members.
The practical lesson is that peer support should be developed with the people who may use it, rather than introduced as a fixed model based solely on experience from another country.
Where does care navigation fit?
Peer support groups do not need to be part of social prescribing to have value. People may discover them through friends, community organizations, online networks or their own initiative.
A social prescribing pathway may provide another way for someone to identify and connect with a suitable group based on their personal priorities.
The World Health Organization's Western Pacific implementation toolkit describes social prescribing as an approach that connects people with non-clinical community services to support health and well-being.[10]
For peer support, a useful navigation conversation might begin by asking what the person hopes to gain from meeting others with similar experiences.
They may want practical encouragement, opportunities to discuss everyday challenges or simply a place where they feel understood. A navigator should also consider whether the group is appropriate, accessible and able to accommodate the individual's preferences and support needs.
Having a particular diagnosis should not automatically lead to a recommendation to join a diagnosis-specific group.
Some people may prefer to contact an organizer themselves. Others may appreciate an introduction. Someone else may decide that peer support is not right for them.
Where a healthcare organization, navigator and community group establish a structured connection process, their respective responsibilities should be understood.
The community group should know what it can reasonably offer and how to raise concerns when necessary. The navigator should understand the group's purpose, limitations and participation arrangements.
Information sharing should remain limited to what is appropriate and legally permitted.
A successful connection should not be measured simply by whether contact details were exchanged. At the same time, peer facilitators should not be expected to monitor medical conditions, provide clinical reports or assume responsibilities that belong to healthcare professionals.
Connecting someone to a peer group through social prescribing is not, by itself, a medical referral or transfer of clinical responsibility under Vietnamese healthcare law. Any separate clinical referral must follow the requirements applicable to that activity.
Care navigation can help people make informed choices about community participation. It should not turn independent peer groups into informal providers of regulated healthcare services.
Professional boundaries and legal responsibilities in Viet Nam
The legal position of a peer support initiative depends on its actual activities, the people delivering them and the organizational setting.
Viet Nam's Law on Medical Examination and Treatment No. 15/2023/QH15, effective January 1, 2024, as subsequently amended and reflected in the 2026 consolidated text, establishes requirements governing medical examination and treatment, healthcare practitioners and healthcare establishments.[11]
Peer support does not independently authorize a facilitator, volunteer or community organization to diagnose illness, provide regulated treatment, change prescribed medication or undertake other healthcare activities requiring professional authorization.
Professional social-work requirements may also be relevant where an organized initiative goes beyond ordinary mutual assistance.
Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work, effective October 15, 2024, establishes a framework for social-work activities and professional practice. Under Article 47, from January 1, 2027, individuals practising social work within the scope of the Decree must hold a social-work practice registration certificate in accordance with its requirements.[12]
Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT, effective August 25, 2026, further regulates social-work practice and the updating of professional knowledge.[13]
Within medical examination and treatment establishments, Circular No. 51/2024/TT-BYT, effective March 1, 2025, addresses the implementation of social-work activities within its specified scope.[14]
These regulations are important for healthcare-connected programs, but they should not be interpreted as meaning that every informal self-help group or ordinary conversation between community members constitutes regulated professional social-work practice.
The distinction depends on what people actually do.
Where a program involves activities falling within regulated medical or social-work practice, the relevant legal requirements must be identified and respected. Where a group provides ordinary mutual encouragement without performing regulated professional functions, different arrangements may be appropriate.
Organizations should also consider applicable personal data protection, child protection and other legal obligations where relevant to their activities and participants.
International guidance can help inform organizational design without replacing Vietnamese law.
For example, NHS England's workforce development framework for social prescribing link workers, updated in July 2026 and published in August, emphasizes role clarity, competence, supervision, professional boundaries and multidisciplinary collaboration.[15]
These are useful principles for learning about safe practice. However, the framework reflects the English healthcare system and does not establish professional licensing requirements in Viet Nam.
For organizations exploring social prescribing locally, it is important to identify existing professional responsibilities before introducing new navigation or peer facilitation functions.
How could a responsible peer support initiative be tested?
A small, carefully designed initiative could help determine whether a particular peer support group is acceptable, feasible and safe in its local setting.
The starting point should be the people who may participate, rather than an assumption that everyone with a shared condition or experience needs the same type of support.
Some may want informal conversations, while others prefer structured discussions around selected topics. Some may value occasional information from qualified professionals. Others may want activities that allow relationships to develop without immediately discussing sensitive personal experiences.
These preferences should influence how the group is organized.
Before a structured program begins, organizers should agree on its purpose, responsibilities, facilitator preparation, participation arrangements, confidentiality expectations and processes for responding to concerns.
Participants should know what the group offers and what it does not.
A group intended for everyday mutual encouragement may need relatively straightforward procedures. A program supporting people with significant distress or complex needs may require additional professional involvement and safeguards.
Evaluation should look beyond the number of people attending.
It would be useful to understand whether participants felt respected, whether they could choose how much to share, whether discussions were relevant to their goals and whether the group provided the mutual understanding they had hoped for.
Feedback from people who chose not to participate or stopped attending may be equally informative. Their experiences may reveal concerns about privacy, accessibility, group dynamics or a mismatch between what was offered and what they wanted.
Facilitators' experiences should also be considered. A program may appear successful from the participants' perspective while placing unsustainable demands on those responsible for organizing it.
Safety-related information deserves attention, including unwanted disclosure, misleading health advice, interpersonal conflict, exclusion or situations requiring professional assistance.
Any collection and use of such information should be proportionate and comply with applicable privacy requirements.
A small pilot may help establish whether an initiative is workable and acceptable in a particular setting. It may also identify improvements needed before further development.
It would not, by itself, demonstrate that peer support improves clinical outcomes, reduces hospital admissions or saves healthcare costs. Such claims require suitable research methods, credible outcome measures and appropriate comparison data.
The purpose of an early initiative should be to learn what works, what does not and what needs to change, rather than to confirm an assumed benefit.
Shared experience is valuable, but it is not enough on its own
There is something meaningful about speaking with another person who has faced a similar challenge.
They may understand concerns that are difficult to explain. They may offer encouragement based on their own experience or simply provide an opportunity to talk without feeling judged.
These connections can matter to people, even when they are not easily captured through conventional clinical measures.
Peer support deserves consideration as one possible component of community-connected care in Viet Nam.
But shared experience does not guarantee reliable information, respectful relationships or a safe environment. A person with lived experience is not automatically qualified to provide professional advice, and a group that benefits some participants may be unsuitable for others.
What matters is how the group operates, whether people genuinely want to participate and whether those involved understand the boundaries of their responsibilities.
Viet Nam has opportunities to learn from existing community networks while considering how peer support might contribute to locally appropriate social prescribing pathways.
The aim should not be to establish groups simply because peer support is gaining international attention. It should be to create opportunities for meaningful mutual support where there is a genuine need, where people have a real choice and where suitable safeguards can be maintained.
When those conditions are present, peer support may become a valuable community resource. When they are absent, shared experience alone is not sufficient reason to recommend a group or connect someone to it.
References
NHS England. (2023). Supported self-management: Peer support guide.
World Health Organization. (2021). Peer support mental health services: Promoting person-centred and rights-based approaches.
Abo-Rass, F., Nakash, O., Friedman, L., O'Neill, P., & Torres, M. E. (2026). Peer-led group support: An umbrella review across physical and mental health conditions. Journal of Mental Health. Published online July 24, 2026.
Abbasi, A., Tran, T. K., Nguyen, C. T. K., et al. (2026). Peer Group Support to Children and Adolescents with HIV: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Vietnam. AIDS and Behavior. Published online June 16, 2026.
Chreim, S., Dobrowolski, J., Wan, A., & Da Silva, E. A. (2026). Mental health peer support workers' experiences and management of interpersonal boundaries: A scoping review and integrative framework. Social Science & Medicine, 399, 119117.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2025). Law No. 91/2025/QH15 on Personal Data Protection. Effective January 1, 2026.
Government of Viet Nam. (2025). Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP detailing certain articles of and measures for implementing the Law on Personal Data Protection. Effective January 1, 2026.
HelpAge International. (n.d.). Vietnam's Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs.
Prime Minister of Viet Nam. (2025). Decision No. 1648/QD-TTg approving the program to expand Intergenerational Self-Help Clubs through 2035.
World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific. (2022). A toolkit on how to implement social prescribing.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2023). Law No. 15/2023/QH15 on Medical Examination and Treatment. Effective January 1, 2024. See also Office of the National Assembly. (2026). Consolidated Document No. 26/VBHN-VPQH on the Law on Medical Examination and Treatment, dated February 26, 2026.
Government of Viet Nam. (2024). Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work. Effective October 15, 2024.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. (2026). Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT on social-work practice and professional knowledge updating. Effective August 25, 2026.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. (2024). Circular No. 51/2024/TT-BYT on the implementation of social-work activities in medical examination and treatment establishments. Effective March 1, 2025.
NHS England. (2026). Workforce development framework for social prescribing link workers. Version 2, updated July 2026; published August 13, 2026.
Article Information
Category: Implementation & Practice
Secondary Category: Evidence & Evaluation
Evidence and regulatory context reviewed: November 1, 2026
Publisher: Social Prescribing Vietnam (SPVN)
Disclaimer
This article is provided for educational, research and general informational purposes only. It does not constitute individualized medical, mental health, social-work or legal advice, clinical guidance, accreditation criteria or official government policy.
Peer support groups vary considerably in purpose, structure, activities, participant needs and risk. References to international frameworks, research findings and community models are provided for comparative learning and do not imply that these approaches have been formally adopted, licensed or endorsed in Viet Nam.
Peer support and social prescribing may complement, but do not replace, appropriate healthcare, mental health treatment, rehabilitation, professional social-work services or emergency assistance. Organizations considering structured peer support or social prescribing pathways should assess the applicable Vietnamese legal, professional, organizational, safeguarding and personal data protection requirements before implementation.
Social Prescribing Vietnam (SPVN) is an education, research, development and collaboration platform. Publication of this article does not indicate that SPVN provides individual peer support, medical treatment, professional social-work services, or personal referral and care navigation services. References to external organizations and publications do not imply affiliation, endorsement or an established partnership.