Examining the role of community resilience and social capital on mental health in public health emergency and disaster response: a scoping review

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The ability of the public to remain psychologically resilient in the face of public health emergencies and disasters (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) is a key factor in the effectiveness of a national response to such events. Community resilience and social capital are often perceived as beneficial and ensuring that a community is socially and psychologically resilient may aid emergency response and recovery. This review presents a synthesis of literature which answers the following research questions: How are community resilience and social capital quantified in research?; What is the impact of community resilience on mental wellbeing?; What is the impact of infectious disease outbreaks, disasters and emergencies on community resilience and social capital?; and, What types of interventions enhance community resilience and social capital?

A scoping review procedure was followed. Searches were run across Medline, PsycInfo, and EMBASE, with search terms covering both community resilience and social capital, public health emergencies, and mental health. 26 papers met the inclusion criteria.

The majority of retained papers originated in the USA, used a survey methodology to collect data, and involved a natural disaster. There was no common method for measuring community resilience or social capital. The association between community resilience and social capital with mental health was regarded as positive in most cases. However, we found that community resilience, and social capital, were initially negatively impacted by public health emergencies and enhanced by social group activities.

Several key recommendations are proposed based on the outcomes from the review, which include: the need for a standardised and validated approach to measuring both community resilience and social capital; that there should be enhanced effort to improve preparedness to public health emergencies in communities by gauging current levels of community resilience and social capital; that community resilience and social capital should be bolstered if areas are at risk of disasters or public health emergencies; the need to ensure that suitable short-term support is provided to communities with high resilience in the immediate aftermath of a public health emergency or disaster; the importance of conducting robust evaluation of community resilience initiatives deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-023-17242-x.

Related collections

Most cited references 63

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

Lisa O'Malley, Hilary Arksey (2005)

0 comments Cited 6570 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change1

RONALD ROGERS (2010)

A protection motivation theory is proposed that postulates the three crucial components of a fear appeal to be (a) the magnitude of noxiousness of a depicted event; (b) the probability of that event's occurrence; and (c) the efficacy of a protective response. Each of these communication variables initiates corresponding cognitive appraisal processes that mediate attitude change. The proposed conceptualization is a special case of a more comprehensive theoretical schema: expectancy-value theories. Several suggestions are offered for reinterpreting existing data, designing new types of empirical research, and making future studies more comparable. Finally, the principal advantages of protection motivation theory over the rival formulations of Janis and Leventhal are discussed.

0 comments Cited 828 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Realist review--a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions.

Ray Pawson, Trisha Greenhalgh, Gill Harvey … (2005)

Evidence-based policy is a dominant theme in contemporary public services but the practical realities and challenges involved in using evidence in policy-making are formidable. Part of the problem is one of complexity. In health services and other public services, we are dealing with complex social interventions which act on complex social systems--things like league tables, performance measures, regulation and inspection, or funding reforms. These are not 'magic bullets' which will always hit their target, but programmes whose effects are crucially dependent on context and implementation. Traditional methods of review focus on measuring and reporting on programme effectiveness, often find that the evidence is mixed or conflicting, and provide little or no clue as to why the intervention worked or did not work when applied in different contexts or circumstances, deployed by different stakeholders, or used for different purposes. This paper offers a model of research synthesis which is designed to work with complex social interventions or programmes, and which is based on the emerging 'realist' approach to evaluation. It provides an explanatory analysis aimed at discerning what works for whom, in what circumstances, in what respects and how. The first step is to make explicit the programme theory (or theories)--the underlying assumptions about how an intervention is meant to work and what impacts it is expected to have. We then look for empirical evidence to populate this theoretical framework, supporting, contradicting or modifying the programme theories as it goes. The results of the review combine theoretical understanding and empirical evidence, and focus on explaining the relationship between the context in which the intervention is applied, the mechanisms by which it works and the outcomes which are produced. The aim is to enable decision-makers to reach a deeper understanding of the intervention and how it can be made to work most effectively. Realist review does not provide simple answers to complex questions. It will not tell policy-makers or managers whether something works or not, but will provide the policy and practice community with the kind of rich, detailed and highly practical understanding of complex social interventions which is likely to be of much more use to them when planning and implementing programmes at a national, regional or local level.

0 comments Cited 481 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

D. Weston: Dale.Weston@ukhsa.gov.uk

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Public Health

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Public Health

Title: BMC Public Health

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1471-2458

Publication date (Electronic): 12 December 2023

Publication date PMC-release: 12 December 2023

Publication date Collection: 2023

Volume: 23

Electronic Location Identifier: 2482

Affiliations

[1 ]Behavioural Science and Insights Unit, Evaluation & Translation Directorate, Science Group, UK Health Security Agency, ( https://ror.org/018h10037) Porton Down, Salisbury, SP4 0JG UK

[3 ]Health Protection Research Unit, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King’s College London, ( https://ror.org/0220mzb33) 10 Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ UK

[2 ]School of Health and Community Studies, Leeds Beckett University, ( https://ror.org/02xsh5r57) Portland Building, PD519, Portland Place, Leeds, LS1 3HE UK

[4 ]King’s Centre for Military Health Research, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King’s College London, ( https://ror.org/0220mzb33) 10 Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ UK

Article

Publisher ID: 17242

DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-17242-x

PMC ID: 10714503

PubMed ID: 38082247

SO-VID: 8bfe53ce-0adc-4773-867b-80cdbb5f78ba

License:

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

History

Date received : 4 April 2022

Date accepted : 16 November 2023

Funding

Funded by: National Institute for Health Research Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response, a partnership between Public Health England, King’s College London and the University of East Anglia

Award ID: NIHR20008900

Funded by: Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, Department of Health and Social Care, as part of a Collaborative Agreement with Leeds Beckett University.

Custom metadata

ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health

Keywords: community resilience,social capital,mental health,community cohesion,public health emergency,disaster,covid-19,recovery,recommendations

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health

Keywords: community resilience, social capital, mental health, community cohesion, public health emergency, disaster, covid-19, recovery, recommendations

Examining the role of community resilience and social capital on mental health in public health emergency and disaster response: a scoping review

Read this article at

Abstract

Supplementary Information

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 63

Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change1

Realist review--a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions.

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 110

Cited by 1

Most referenced authors 588