Development and validation of new measure to assess social connection in long‐term care residents: the SONNET study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Long‐term care (LTC) home residents may be isolated or lonely. Social connection is important for their physical, mental and cognitive health, quality of life and care. However, measuring social connection in LTC residents is challenging and there are no existing measures with adequately established psychometric properties. We aimed to develop and test a new measure of social connection for LTC residents. Method The SONNET study consisted of three projects with data collection carried out in parallel in LTC homes in Canada and the UK. First, we conducted a systematic review of existing measures of social connection in LTC residents, finding 62 studies reporting on 38 measures; none had sufficient evidence to be recommended for use. Second, we conducted qualitative interviews about key components of social connection with 67 LTC residents with and without dementia, family caregivers, staff, and clinicians. Third, we used these findings to inform candidate items for a scale with resident‐rated and proxy‐rated versions based on measurable domains and indicators of social engagement and social connectedness. We refined and reduced these through patient and public engagement and pilot interviews. We pre‐tested the long‐form scale in LTC residents for usability, missing data, response option distribution, internal consistency and factor structure. We then field‐tested the final SONNET measure for reliability, content and construct validity. Result We tested the SONNET measure with 111 LTC residents, including 40 with dementia (mean age 85.3y.) The measure was feasible with complete data in 86.8% of resident‐rated responses and 98.8% of carer‐rated responses. Internal consistency was high (resident‐rated scale α = 0.85, proxy‐rated α = 0.83) Exploratory factor analysis showed that SONNET scale sum scores are reliable in measuring overall social connection, and subdomains ‘social engagement’ and ‘social connectedness’. Conclusion The SONNET measure assesses key domains of social connection in LTC residents and there is preliminary evidence of its reliability and validity. Further studies of its psychometric properties in independent samples of LTC residents including longitudinal data to assess its sensitivity to detect change and predictive and cross‐cultural validity are required. The SONNET measure will be freely available for researchers to use.
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 | 0.015 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".