CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 135Social Capital and NetworksHealth disparities and outcomesCommunity Health and Development

Mental health impact of social capital interventions: A systematic review

Open access
Flores, Elaine C., Fuhr, Daniela C., Bayer, Angela M., Lescano, Andres G., Thorogood, Nicki, Simms, Victoria·2018·Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
DOI 10.1007/s00127-017-1469-7PMC PMC6040224
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose Mental disorders are a major contributor to the global burden of disease and disability, and can be extremely costly at both individual and community level. Social capital, (SC) defined as an individual's social relationships and participation in community networks, may lower the risk of mental disorders while increasing resilience capacity, adaptation and recovery. SC interventions may be a cost-effective way of preventing and ameliorating these conditions. However, the impact of these SC interventions on mental health still needs research.Methods We conducted a systematic review of SC-based interventions to investigate their effect on mental health outcomes from controlled, quasi-experimental studies or pilot trials. We searched twelve academic databases, three clinical trials registries, hand-searched references and contacted field experts. Studies' quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools for randomized and non-randomized studies.Results Seven studies were included in the review, published between 2006 and 2016. There was substantial heterogeneity in the definitions of both SC and mental disorders among the studies, preventing us from calculating pooled effect sizes. The interventions included community engagement and educative programs, cognitive processing therapy and sociotherapy for trauma survivors, and neighbourhood projects.Conclusions There are paucity of SC interventions investigating the effect on mental health outcomes. This study showed that both SC scores and mental health outcomes improved over time but there was little evidence of benefit compared to control groups in the long term. Further high-quality trials are needed, especially among adverse populations to assess sustainability of effect.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00127-017-1469-7

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent reviews have shown that loneliness interventions informed by a social identity approach are particularly promising.

    “Supporting this suggestion, recent reviews have shown that loneliness interventions informed by a social identity approach are particularly promising (Flores et al., 2018;Steffens et al., 2021).”

    From Acceptability and Feasibility of an Intervention to Enhance Social Group Belonging: Evidence From Three Trials of Groups 4 Health (2022) · cites this paper as Flores et al., 2018

    The Discussion (page unavailable) highlights a social-identity-mapping pilot for self-reported socially isolated participants, reporting improved mental-health scores, and calls social-capital interventions promising. The Results (page unavailable) describes the pilot’s measured outcomes as including depression and anxiety, not loneliness. Thus the review supports promise for a social-identity intervention among socially isolated people, but does not establish that it reduced loneliness. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 84 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Flores, E. C., Fuhr, D. C., Bayer, A. M., Lescano, A. G., Thorogood, N., & Simms, V.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (PE)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Flores, Elaine C.
ORCID
Venue
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-12-12
Volume
53
Issue
2
Pages
107-119
ISSN
  • 0933-7954 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-9285
DOI
10.1007/s00127-017-1469-7
PMC
PMC6040224
OpenAlex
W2772635566
Cited by
135
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5
FWCI
2.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (unspecified)
Locations
  • Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Fogarty International Center (US) (2D43 TW007393-06)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Capital and Networks
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
Keywords
social capital, mental health interventions, mental illness, community participation, cognitive processing therapy, trauma survivors, sociotherapy, resilience, social networks, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Mental Disorders, Clinical Trials as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotherapy, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Cost of Illness, Young Adult, Social Participation, Social Capital

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review