EFFECTS OF A THEORY-ORIENTED SOCIAL FACILITATION INTERVENTION ON SOCIAL ISOLATION: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Transitioning to a nursing home represents significant life changes, which often result in a significant reduction and potential dissolution of pre-existing emotional bonds with family, friends, and social networks. Social facilitation is essential to help nursing home residents adapt a new life in nursing home. Thus, this study aimed to develop and examine the effects of the social facilitation program based on the cognitive-behavioral model of social isolation (SFCBSI), on social isolation, subjective well-being, cognitive tendencies, psychological adjustment, self-efficacy, and social support of nursing home residents. A randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, parallel-arm trial was conducted in two nursing homes Fujian, Southeast of China from September 2023 to February 2024. 180 participants were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n = 90) and the control group (n = 90). The control group received routine institutional care. The intervention group received the SFCBSI program involving cognitive reconstruction, emotional management, and behavioral change, which was implemented by group for 4 weeks. Participants were assessed using the Cognitive Appraisal Orientation Test, Nursing Home Adjustment Scale, General Selfefficacy Scale, Perceived Social Support Scale, Social Isolation Scale and the Memorial University of Newfoundland Scale of Happiness Survey. Outcomes were evaluated at baseline and immediately after the intervention. The intervention participants showed significant differences in social isolation, subjective well-being, cognitive tendencies, psychological adjustment, self-efficacy, and social support, compared to the control group (P < 0.001). It indicates that the SFCBSI could reduce social isolation and improve psychological well-being among nursing home residents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".