Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026
Social capital in health research ‒ Conceptual model of disease-specific social capital based on disease-specific social networks.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lehto Ulla-Sisko, Ojanen Markku, Turpeenniemi-Hujanen Taina
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Social capital is a resource derived from human social structure comprising social networks and their cognitive contents, such as values and norms, e.g., trust. These are old psychological concepts, but psychological theories and conceptualization are often ignored in studying social capital in public health research.
STUDY DESIGN: A narrative review-based analysis of the components of social capital from a psychological perspective.
METHODS: We examine the health-enhancing components of individual-level social capital by incorporating corresponding psychological concepts. We propose a model that illustrates the impact of social capital dimensions on the health of individuals after the diagnosis of a chronic or severe disease.
RESULTS: We concur with the suggestion that the social capital process comprises the determinants, components (social structure, its contents), and outcomes. We propose that after diagnosis, the components should be divided into generic and disease-specific types, which are based on generic and disease-specific social networks, respectively. Generic social networks consist of individuals known to the patients, while disease-specific networks include those with whom patients have contact regarding the disease (discussed it with the patient or are involved in treatment and care). Furthermore, different types of trust must be distinguished. Generalized trust, as a stable personality factor, is included in determinants, not components. Trust toward specific people should be divided into trust toward members of generic social networks and disease-specific social networks, thus being components of either generic or disease-specific social capital.
CONCLUSIONS: Different subcomponents of social capital should be recognized in public health research and when studying individuals with chronic diseases.
STUDY DESIGN: A narrative review-based analysis of the components of social capital from a psychological perspective.
METHODS: We examine the health-enhancing components of individual-level social capital by incorporating corresponding psychological concepts. We propose a model that illustrates the impact of social capital dimensions on the health of individuals after the diagnosis of a chronic or severe disease.
RESULTS: We concur with the suggestion that the social capital process comprises the determinants, components (social structure, its contents), and outcomes. We propose that after diagnosis, the components should be divided into generic and disease-specific types, which are based on generic and disease-specific social networks, respectively. Generic social networks consist of individuals known to the patients, while disease-specific networks include those with whom patients have contact regarding the disease (discussed it with the patient or are involved in treatment and care). Furthermore, different types of trust must be distinguished. Generalized trust, as a stable personality factor, is included in determinants, not components. Trust toward specific people should be divided into trust toward members of generic social networks and disease-specific social networks, thus being components of either generic or disease-specific social capital.
CONCLUSIONS: Different subcomponents of social capital should be recognized in public health research and when studying individuals with chronic diseases.