Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41835930›Full record

ArticleBMJ public health2026

Conceptualisation and operationalisation of social support in health interventions: a scoping review.

Jessica Kersey, Sangjin Lee, Lisa Tabor Connor, Sarah Shyres, Elnaz Alimi, Noemi Rojas Serrano, Moon Young Kim, Phan Van Sang, Noelle Casem, Christian Le and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jessica KerseyProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9082-6962
Sangjin LeeProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Lisa Tabor ConnorProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Sarah ShyresProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Elnaz AlimiDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Noemi Rojas SerranoProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Moon Young KimProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8566-2091
Phan Van SangNational Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Noelle CasemProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Christian LeThe University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
Kim LipseyBernard Becker Medical Library, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Elena Donoso BrownJohn G Rangos Sr School of Health Sciences, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Social support influences health outcomes for individuals with chronic conditions, yet there is variability in how it is conceptualised and operationalised in health research. We examined how social support is conceptualised, measured and addressed through health interventions. Design: Scoping review. Data sources: PubMed/Medline, Elsevier EMBASE, NIBAHL and APA PsycInfo. Eligibility criteria: Studies were included if they examined the effects of an intervention that aimed to build or strengthen social support in an adult population with a chronic health condition or disability. Data extraction and synthesis: We extracted data on study characteristics (study design, sample size, diagnostic group), social support outcome measures, social support domains addressed and intervention characteristics. Results: Across 110 studies, interventions predominantly addressed emotional support (85.1%) and informational support (54.4%), with limited attention to tangible support (5.3%). Despite previous research suggesting that affectionate support and positive social interaction are highly valued social support domains, these were addressed less often. Interventions were predominantly delivered in dyadic formats (43.9%), by peer supporters (35.1%) and mental health professionals (35.4%). Psychosocial skills development and social network expansion were the most frequently employed intervention components, each included in 45.6% of interventions. Relationship quality was the primary focus of social support assessment tools. Conclusions: This review suggests that social support is most commonly conceptualised as a dynamic relational process built on emotional connection and shared experiences, rather than merely the assistance provided. Future interventions should better integrate affectionate support and positive social interaction, along with adaptability to accommodate cultural and social preferences.

Indexed as

Public HealthScoping ReviewSocial Cohesion

Identifiers

PMID41835930
PMCPMC12983841

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.