ArticlePloS one2025
Relationships between community public service facilities and social capital: An exploratory study of Harbin, China.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social capital is closely intertwined with neighborhood environments and facility provisions. It is a vital resource for supporting residents' happiness and satisfaction. In the context of urban stock development and the concentrated construction of community public service facilities, it remains unclear whether the spontaneous construction of facilities follows a colocation model and how facility-related construction affects residents' quality of life. In this study, we used a questionnaire survey to analyze social capital, summarizing it into aspects such as community cohesion, social support, community trust, and sense of belonging. Then, we acquired the points of interest for facilities in Harbin, China, computed the Global Colocation Quotient (GCLQ) and Local Colocation Quotient (LCLQ), the proportion of spatial units occupied by facilities, and the Shannon diversity index, and analyzed the patterns. Aged care services, childcare centers, and community cultural services were found to have the strongest mutual attractions. Finally, an ordinary least squares model was constructed. The proportion of spatial units occupied by community public service facilities was closely related to social capital growth. In the relationship between the colocation model and social capital, LCLQ-healthcare showed a negative correlation, LCLQ-aged care and LCLQ-childcare showed a positive correlation, and LCLQ-cultural and sports showed a positive correlation with a sense of community belonging. The geographically weighted regression model indicated significant spatial heterogeneity in how facility-related construction affects social capital. This study offers a foundation and reference for the sustainable planning and development of integrated community public service facilities.
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.