Abstract
Structural characteristics of social networks such as primary group size have received less attention than measures of perceived social support. Previous research suggests that associations between social network size and later common mental disorder status may differ according to sex and initial mental state. Adults participating in the 2000 British National Household Survey of psychiatric morbidity were randomly selected for follow-up 18 months later. The revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R) and the Interview Measure of Social Relations (IMSR) were administered at baseline and follow-up. Primary group size was defined as the total number of close relatives and friends. A four-level scale of common mental disorder was modelled with ordinal logistic regression, based on weighted data (n=2413). After adjusting for confounders, a primary group size of three or less at time 1 predicted worse mental health at time 2. This effect was greatest in men who were initially non-cases at baseline (averaged odds 4.5) and in women who were initially cases at baseline (average odds 2.9). Primary group size at time 2 was significantly predicted by level of common mental disorder at time 1 in women but not in men. Thus, confounding by baseline disorder does not explain risk of developing poor mental health in socially isolated men. This study replicates the strong effects of primary group size on future mental health that emerge when men and women are studied separately and when subjects are categorized according to baseline mental health status.
Highlights
BackgroundStructural characteristics of social networks such as their size have received less attention than measures of perceived social support Brugha et al (2003)
This study replicates the strong effects of primary group size on future mental health that emerge when men and women are studied separately and when subjects are categorized according to baseline mental health status
Social network size may have a greater bearing on the risk of developing mental ill health in men than in women, but it is possible that this gender effect is reversed when we look at the prognosis of those who are already assessed as cases
Summary
Structural characteristics of social networks such as their size have received less attention than measures of perceived social support Brugha et al (2003). In 1978 Scott Henderson showed that the size of the primary group, those felt to be close in a person’s social support network, was significantly smaller in psychiatric outpatients than in community controls (Henderson et al 1978). These findings were replicated by Brugha et al (1982), and by Meltzer and colleagues (1995 a), who reported data from the first British National Survey of Psychiatric Morbidity. Previous research suggests that associations between social network size and later common mental disorder status may differ according to sex and initial mental state
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
