Trial reportSocial science & medicine (1982)2024
Application of an egocentric social network approach to examine changes in social connections following treatment for anxiety and depression: A novel measurement tool for clinical trials research?
Trial report in Social science & medicine (1982), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social network structure and depression by gender in rural Honduras: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2026Observational
- Sport as a social capital intervention promoting health and well-being for migrant youth in Australia.Health promotion international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The epidemic of loneliness and social isolation has been recognized as a public health crisis warranting the same prioritization as other public health issues today, such as obesity, substance use disorders, and tobacco use. Social disconnection is particularly prevalent and disabling among individuals with anxiety and depression, yet it is inadequately evaluated and addressed in most clinical psychology treatment research. Studies generally employ global measures of perceived connectedness, loneliness, or relationship satisfaction, limiting understanding about elements of one's social network that may change with treatment. This study examined changes in the degree (number of people nominated) and quality of one's social network from pre-to post-treatment using an egocentric social network approach in 59 adults (mean age = 30.8 years, range = 18 to 54) with clinically elevated anxiety or depression who were randomized to a cognitive and behavioral positive valence treatment versus waitlist. Participants (egos) named people in their lives (alters) with whom they discussed important issues or spent free time. For each alter, participants rated how close they felt, how close they thought the alter felt to them, and how frequently they communicated. Linear regressions, which included treatment group as a predictor, revealed no group differences in changes in network degree, perceived alter feelings of closeness, or communication frequency, despite prior findings from this sample indicating larger increases in perceived global connectedness in the treatment group. Unexpectedly, the control group reported a greater increase in perceived closeness to alters. Post-hoc analyses revealed this was explained by the treatment group identifying more distal social ties (e.g., extended family, colleagues, roommates) as alters following treatment - an outcome positively associated with global improvements in connectedness. This proof-of-concept study suggests egocentric social network surveys may provide unique information on treatment-related changes in social functioning. Suggestions are provided for adaptations to facilitate application of social network surveys to mental health treatment research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.