ArticleBMJ open2025
Relationship patterns in social networks of patients with depression in physical and online interactions: a sequential qualitative approach.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
objectivesFirst, to understand social needs in different mental disorders. Second, to determine patterns of social behaviour for either physical and online encounters in patients with depression.
designSequential qualitative design: (1) exploratory qualitative interview study investigating social needs of mentally disordered patients, followed by (2) qualitative network analysis of patients and healthy controls, analysed using inductive coding and triangulation for data aggregation and network visualisation. Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) were followed.
setting(1) Professionals from inpatient and outpatient mental health services of psychosomatic medicine, psychotherapy and psychiatry. (2) Patients from outpatient services, healthy controls from various settings.
participants(1) Nine mental health professionals with seven physicians and two psychological psychotherapists took part in interviews. (2) Network interviews were conducted with 10 patients with a diagnosis of depression given within the past year and nine healthy controls with matching sociodemographic characteristics.
resultsSocial relationships influence both the illness history and symptom profile of patients with depression. Patients reported less encounters compared with controls, although the frequency of their encounters was higher. Patients reported positive and trustful, yet more ambivalent relationships. Patients perceived less trust, but more influence on personal well-being by their encounters. Online contacts were described as more superficial by both groups.
conclusionsQualitative network analysis reveals patterns of social needs in physical and online encounters and their visualisation allows for direct group comparisons. Biopsychosocial research designs with a larger sample size are recommended. Targeted interventions have to regard the complexity of relationship patterns in physical and online interactions.
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.