Social networks and health: A systematic review of sociocentric network studies in low- and middle-income countries

Abstract

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), naturally occurring social networks may be particularly vital to health outcomes as extended webs of social ties often are the principal source of various resources. Understanding how social network structure, and influential individuals within the network, may amplify the effects of interventions in LMICs, by creating, for example, cascade effects to non-targeted participants, presents an opportunity to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public health interventions in such settings. We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, Econlit, Sociological Abstracts, and PsycINFO to identify a sample of 17 sociocentric network papers (arising from 10 studies) that specifically examined health issues in LMICs. We also separately selected to review 19 sociocentric network papers (arising from 10 other studies) on development topics related to wellbeing in LMICs. First, to provide a methodological resource, we discuss the sociocentric network study designs employed in the selected papers, and then provide a catalog of 105 name generator questions used to measure social ties across all the LMIC network papers (including both ego- and sociocentric network papers) cited in this review. Second, we show that network composition, individual network centrality, and network structure are associated with important health behaviors and health and development outcomes in different contexts across multiple levels of analysis and across distinct network types. Lastly, we highlight the opportunities for health researchers and practitioners in LMICs to 1) design effective studies and interventions in LMICs that account for the sociocentric network positions of certain individuals and overall network structure, 2) measure the spread of outcomes or intervention externalities, and 3) enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of aid based on knowledge of social structure. In summary, human health and wellbeing are connected through complex webs of dynamic social relationships. Harnessing such information may be especially important in contexts where resources are limited and people depend on their direct and indirect connections for support.

Social connectedness improves public mental health: Investigating bidirectional relationships in the New Zealand attitudes and values survey

“…People with limited social connectedness have poorer mental and physical health, including increased depression (Cruwys, Haslam, Dingle, Haslam, & Jetten, 2014a), and die earlier than those with strong social connectedness (for a meta-analysis, see Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Layton, 2010). There is widespread consensus in the public health and epidemiology literatures that social connectedness causally protects and promotes mental health (Kawachi & Berkman, 2001;Perkins, Subramanian, & Christakis, 2015).…”

“…People with limited social connectedness have poorer mental and physical health, including increased depression (Cruwys, Haslam, Dingle, Haslam, & Jetten, 2014a), and die earlier than those with strong social connectedness (for a meta-analysis, see Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Layton, 2010). There is widespread consensus in the public health and epidemiology literatures that social connectedness causally protects and promotes mental health (Kawachi & Berkman, 2001;Perkins, Subramanian, & Christakis, 2015).However, models that specify the reverse causal relationship are also common among clinicians; the loss of social connectedness is frequently described as a consequence of mental illness.Indeed, a key diagnostic criterion of Major Depressive Disorder is that symptoms "cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning" (emphasis added, p. 161, American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). This tension between the two perspectives remains unresolved despite an emerging body of longitudinal work, partly due to the lack of a simultaneous test of the bidirectional relationships that may robustly demonstrate the direction of the causal effect between social connectedness and mental health.…”

Formation of raiding parties for intergroup violence is mediated by social network structure

“…Although social networks are known to facilitate solutions to collective action problems (30)(31)(32) and to have a role in the emergence of both cooperation (33,34) and violence (35), prior work on the structure of social networks (36) and their role in the emergence of violence in evolutionarily relevant populations is limited. A study among the Yanomamö examined how coparticipation in lethal intergroup violence influenced alliances later in life, finding that men who participated together in a killing were likely to live together and exchange marriage partners (37).…”

Social influence on 5-year survival in a longitudinal chemotherapy ward co-presence network

“…However, all of these studies build the evidence base that the connections between people within a network have important implications for social influence processes that facilitate cancer patients' adaptation to their diagnosis and treatment. Moreover, there is a breadth of research showing that social influence is impacted by network structure for a variety of health outcomes, and this is robust across age, race, and socio-economic status (Christakis & Fowler, 2007;Mercken et al, 2012;Perkins et al, 2014;Valente et al, 2003). Indeed, this body 312 J.…”