ArticleBMJ public health2026
Effects of social support interventions on social, physical and mental health outcomes: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. 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
- Comment on
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Social support interventions show promise for improving health, yet evidence regarding their effectiveness and optimal approaches remains limited. We aimed to examine social support intervention outcomes. Design: Scoping review. Data sources: PubMed/Medline, Elsevier EMBASE, NIBAHL and APA PsychInfo. The search was last conducted in October 2024. Eligibility criteria: Included studies reported the effects of interventions on the social support outcomes, mental health or physical health of adults with chronic health conditions or disabilities. Studies were excluded if interventions did not aim to build or strengthen sustainable social support or did not provide quantitative outcome data. Data extraction and synthesis: We extracted data on intervention characteristics, intervention elements and effect sizes. We synthesised effect sizes based on outcome type and intervention provider, then examined patterns in effect sizes. Results: Interventions (n=110) were commonly delivered by peer mentors (35.1%) or mental health professionals (35.4%), primarily targeting emotional and informational support. There were small to moderate intervention effects. Skill-building interventions delivered by health professionals appeared more effective than peer-delivered interventions, but results were inconsistent across studies and there were still meaningful effects from peer mentorship. Conclusions: Effective interventions actively facilitated meaningful support by providing resources, assistance or health behaviour encouragement. Multicomponent interventions combining professional expertise with peer mentorship may optimise outcomes. Future research should further compare intervention components and formats and establish clear mechanisms linking social support improvements to health outcomes through larger-scale effectiveness trials.
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.