Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33203632›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Value of social network analysis for developing and evaluating complex healthcare interventions: a scoping review.

Linda C Smit, Jeroen Dikken, Marieke J Schuurmans, Niek J de Wit, Nienke Bleijenberg

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Linda C SmitResearch Centre for Healthy and Sustainable Living, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands linda.smit@hu.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-5488-2967
Jeroen DikkenFaculty of Health, Nutrition & Sport, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Marieke J SchuurmansEducation Center, UMC Utrecht Academy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Niek J de WitDepartment of General Practice, Division Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Nienke BleijenbergResearch Centre for Healthy and Sustainable Living, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
University of Applied Sciences Utrecht · NLThe Hague University of Applied Sciences · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMost complex healthcare interventions target a network of healthcare professionals. Social network analysis (SNA) is a powerful technique to study how social relationships within a network are established and evolve. We identified in which phases of complex healthcare intervention research SNA is used and the value of SNA for developing and evaluating complex healthcare interventions.

methodsA scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework. We included complex healthcare intervention studies using SNA to identify the study characteristics, level of complexity of the healthcare interventions, reported strengths and limitations, and reported implications of SNA. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews 2018 was used to guide the reporting.

resultsAmong 2466 identified studies, 40 studies were selected for analysis. At first, the results showed that SNA seems underused in evaluating complex intervention research. Second, SNA was not used in the development phase of the included studies. Third, the reported implications in the evaluation and implementation phase reflect the value of SNA in addressing the implementation and population complexity. Fourth, pathway complexity and contextual complexity of the included interventions were unclear or unable to access. Fifth, the use of a mixed methods approach was reported as a strength, as the combination and integration of a quantitative and qualitative method clearly establishes the results.

conclusionSNA is a widely applicable method that can be used in different phases of complex intervention research. SNA can be of value to disentangle and address the level of complexity of complex healthcare interventions. Furthermore, the routine use of SNA within a mixed method approach could yield actionable insights that would be useful in the transactional context of complex interventions.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareSocial Network AnalysisHealth FacilitiesHealth PersonnelHealth ServicesHumansepidemiologypublic healthstatistics & research methods

Identifiers

PMID33203632
PMCPMC7674094
OpenAlexW3102020374

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.