Make social connection a priority in policies and practices

Confidence

Quality of Evidence

The evidence supporting the integration of social connection as a priority in policies and practices is of moderate quality. Research indicates that policies at various levels of governance significantly impact social wellbeing and community health. Policies that promote social infrastructure, such as public spaces, community centers, and social programming, have been shown to enhance social cohesion, reduce loneliness, and improve public health outcomes. Conversely, policies that neglect social aspects can lead to increased social isolation and disparities in wellbeing. Although the evidence is strong, it often comes from case studies, observational research, and natural experiments, which may lack the controlled rigor of randomized trials but still provide compelling insights into the importance of socially oriented policies.

Balance of Benefits and Harms

The balance of benefits versus harms in prioritizing social connection in policies and practices is strongly in favor of benefits. Policies that intentionally foster social connection can lead to stronger communities, reduced social inequalities, and improved mental and physical health outcomes. The potential harms, such as the misallocation of resources or unintended consequences of policy changes, are generally minimal and can be mitigated through careful planning, stakeholder engagement, and ongoing policy evaluation. The guideline’s emphasis on reviewing existing policies to assess their social impacts helps minimize risks and enhances the overall benefits.

Alignment with Values and Preferences

This guideline aligns well with the values and preferences of communities and policymakers who prioritize public health, social equity, and community wellbeing. The recommendation to consider the social impacts of policy decisions resonates with stakeholders across sectors, including health, urban planning, education, and social services. While some policymakers may face challenges in prioritizing social connection due to competing demands, the guideline’s focus on integrating social considerations into existing policies and practices makes it highly acceptable across diverse governance contexts.

Feasibility

The feasibility of making social connection a priority in policies and practices is moderate. While many communities and governments recognize the importance of social connection, integrating these considerations into existing policies and practices requires coordination, political will, and resources. However, the guideline provides practical steps, such as reviewing current policies and investing in social programming, that can be adapted to different governance levels and contexts. The existing policy frameworks and the potential for leveraging community organizations and social infrastructure increase the feasibility of implementing this guideline effectively.

Certainty of Recommendation

Based on our assessment of the above criteria, we are confident that making social connection a priority in policy and practice is important to promoting population-level social wellbeing. Our primary reservations relate to the relative lack of evidence identifying which approaches are most cost-effective and the extent to which approaches must be tailored to local contexts. Nevertheless, we believe the likelihood that additional information or evidence would cause us to reverse this recommendation is low.

Overall Assessment

The overall rating for this guideline is Strong Recommendation, Moderate Quality of Evidence.