Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42565829›Full record

ArticleSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2026

Social support as a catalyst for changes in mental healthcare usage: insights from a four-year cohort study.

Thijs Beckers, Bauke Koekkoek, Bea Tiemens, Giel Hutschemaekers

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Thijs BeckersRadboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. thijsbeckers@me.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1557-5387
Bauke KoekkoekHAN University of Applied Science, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Bea TiemensRadboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Giel HutschemaekersRadboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

SIA RAAK PRO-3-05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMatching intensity to people's needs and circumstances requires rethinking traditional care pathways and aligning them with personal recovery goals by reducing dependency on professionals where possible. Social support is recognized as a crucial factor in mental healthcare usage, and this study examined its role in how the intensity of mental healthcare is adjusted.

methodsWe analyzed data from a four-year naturalistic cohort study of Dutch individuals with mental disorders (n = 293). The Social Network Map was employed to assess social support. The Mental Healthcare Intensity Scale measured healthcare usage. A linear mixed-effects model was utilized to explore the relationship between social support and healthcare intensity, while controlling for demographic variables and healthcare usage one year earlier.

resultsPrevious levels of social support significantly influenced the intensity of mental healthcare. Participants with little support saw minimal changes in the intensity of the care they received. However, those with more support experienced dynamic changes, which differed significantly from those in the previous year. This effect was both positive and negative. It showed that social support acts as a catalyst by either escalating or deescalating the intensity of care needed.

conclusionSocial support plays a vital role in adjustments in the intensity of mental healthcare. This underscores the need for mental health professionals to incorporate social support assessments into clinical evaluations and be aware of this effect when deciding on the intensity of mental healthcare needed for people with a mental illness.

Indexed as

Intensity of mental healthcareSevere mental illnessSocial support

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.