30 Chapter 2 psychiatric populations. Therefore, interventions focusing on enhancement of social support between participants of (peer support) group interventions were not selected. Besides, social skills training interventions are often aimed at improving social functioning and may not directly address enhancement of social networks in real life (Killaspy et al., 2022; Turner et al., 2018). Therefore, we selected social skills training interventions with an explicit focus on improving the quality and/or size of the social network and social support, such as interventions that included natural support members (Pettus-Davis, 2011). Furthermore, we selected studies that examined social network interventions for psychiatric patients in mental healthcare settings. To obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness to date, we chose to include a broader range of primary and secondary mental health-related outcomes reported in clinical trials. In addition, it is possible that outcome, sample, intervention, and study characteristics could moderate the effects of social network interventions on outcomes. Examination of these characteristics is warranted to provide an in-depth understanding of the effectiveness. For example, effects might be more evident in studies with methodological limitations (e.g., high risk of bias). Examination of sample characteristics could help to inform the field which specific psychiatric populations (e.g., patients with psychotic, substance use, or other disorders) might benefit more from social network interventions. The need to uncover what works best to enhance social networks and social support, “who should provide what to whom (and when)”, is repeatedly expressed (Heaney & Israel, 2008). Therefore, the purpose of this study was twofold. First, we aimed to examine the effectiveness of social network interventions on social network outcomes and on secondary mental health outcomes in psychiatric patients. Subsequently, we aimed to optimize knowledge regarding personalized care by examining potential moderators of effectiveness. METHODS This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2020 (PRISMA 2020) statement (Page et al., 2021), see Appendix A. This meta-analysis has been preregistered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42019128709). Search strategy A systematic search was performed from inception to December 21, 2022, in the bibliographic databases PubMed, EMBASE.com, APA PsycInfo, Scopus, and IBSS. The
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw