Introducing SoNHR - Reporting guidelines for social networks in health research
Luke, D.; Tsai, E.; Carothers, B. J.; Malone, S.; Prusaczyk, B.; Combs, T. B.; Vogel, M. T.; Neal, J. W.; Neal, Z. P.
Show abstract
ObjectiveThe overall goal of this work is to produce a set of recommendations (SoNHR - Social Networks in Health Research) that will improve the reporting and dissemination of social network concepts, methods, data, and analytic results within health sciences research. MethodsThis study used a modified-Delphi approach for recommendation development consistent with best practices suggested by the EQUATOR health sciences reporting guidelines network. An initial set of 28 reporting recommendations was developed by the author team. A group of 67 (of 147 surveyed) experienced network and health scientists participated in an online feedback survey. They rated the clarity and importance of the individual recommendations, and provided qualitative feedback on the coverage, usability, and dissemination opportunities of the full set of recommendations. After examining the feedback, a final set of 18 recommendations was produced. ResultsThe final SoNHR reporting guidelines are comprised of 18 recommendations organized within five domains: conceptualization (how study research questions are linked to network conceptions or theories), operationalization (how network science portions of the study are defined and operationalized), data collection & management (how network data are collected and managed), analyses & results (how network results are analyzed, visualized, and reported), and ethics & equity (how network-specific human subjects, equity, and social justice concerns are reported). We also present a set of exemplar published network studies which can be helpful for seeing how to apply the SoNHR recommendations in research papers. Finally, we discuss how different audiences can use these reporting guidelines. ConclusionsThese are the first set of formal reporting recommendations of network methods in the health sciences. Consistent with EQUATOR goals, these network reporting recommendations may in time improve the quality, consistency, and replicability of network science across a wide variety of important health research areas.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Common misconceptions held by health researchers when interpreting linear regression assumptions, a cross-sectional study 95%
- Modelling the impact of behavioural interventions during pandemics: A systematic review 94%
- The Pandemic Journaling Project: A new dataset of first-person accounts of the COVID-19 pandemic 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Scalability of mobile technology interventions in the prevention and management of HIV among adolescents in low- and middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic review 94%
- The use of the positive deviance approach for healthcare system service improvement: A scoping review protocol 93%
- Key factors for effective implementation of healthcare workers support interventions in health organisations after patient safety incidents: a protocol for a scoping review 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Scientific hypothesis generation process in clinical research: a secondary data analytic tool versus experience study protocol 95%
- Strategies and Tools for electronic health records and physician workflow alignment: A scoping review protocol 93%
- Exposure to and engagement with digital psychoeducational content and community related to maternal mental health by perinatal persons and mothers: design of an online survey with optional follow-up and participant characteristics 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- How should job crafting interventions be implemented to make their effects last? Study protocol of group concept mapping 93%
- Identifying Online Advice-Seekers for Recovering from Opioid Use Disorder 92%
- Perceptions and willingness of patients and caregivers on the utilization of patient-generated health data: a cross-sectional survey 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review 94%
- Defining Destigmatizing Design Guidelines for Use in Sexual Health-Related Digital Technologies: A Delphi Study 94%
- Ethical review of clinical research with generative AI: Evaluating ChatGPT’s accuracy and reproducibility 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.