Cited by 265Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityFocus Groups and Qualitative MethodsOnline and Blended Learning

A Meta-Analysis of Research on Formal Computer-Mediated Support Groups: Examining Group Characteristics and Health Outcomes

Rains, Stephen A., Young, Valerie·2009·Human Communication Research

Abstract

This article reports a meta-analysis of 28 studies examining the health-related outcomes associated with participation in a formal computer-mediated support group (CMSG) intervention. In particular, health outcomes related to social support were assessed and four group-level characteristics of CMSGs were tested as potential moderators of intervention effectiveness. The results show that participating in a CMSG intervention—comprised of educational and group communication components—led to increased social support, decreased depression, increased quality of life, and increased self-efficacy to manage one's health condition. Changes in health outcomes were moderated by group size, the nature of the communication channels available, and the duration of the CMSG intervention.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01353.x

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rains, S. A., & Young, V.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Rains, Stephen A.
Venue
Human Communication Research
Published
2009-07
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
309-336
ISSN
  • 0360-3989 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2958
OpenAlex
W2045496034
Cited by
265
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 12
FWCI
1.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human Communication Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
online health interventions, social support, depression, quality of life, self-efficacy, group size, communication channels, intervention duration, moderators of intervention effectiveness

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