Building a communication and support network among quality improvement teams in nursing homes: a longitudinal study of the SCOPE trial

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of networks in Alberta and British Columbia

	All types of relations						Communication and Collaboration
	Alberta			British Columbia			Alberta			British Columbia
Measure	Before	1st follow-up	2nd follow-up	Before	1st follow-up	2nd follow-up	Before^a	1st follow-up	2nd follow-up	Before	1st follow-up	2nd follow-up
Number of ties	27	28	35	13	22	48	-	4	30	-	6	19
Density overall	15%	15%	19%	5%	8%	18%	-	2%	17%	-	2%	8%
Density by region	Edmonton: 18% Central and Calgary: 50% Between: 2%	Edmonton: 15% Central and Calgary: 63% Between: 2%	Edmonton: 16% Central and Calgary: 53% Between: 10%	Interior: 20% Fraser: 6% Between: 1%	Interior: 30% Fraser: 10% Between: 2%	Interior: 57% Fraser: 23% Between: 5%	-	Edmonton: 0 Central and Calgary: 13% Between: 0	Edmonton: 14% Central and Calgary: 40% Between: 10%	-	Interior: 13% Fraser: 0 Between: 2%	Interior: 30% Fraser: 8% Between: 1%
Reciprocity	29.6%	42.9%	22.9%	46%	27%	42%	-	0	13%	-	33.3%	42.1%
In-degree centralization	8.2%	15.4%	3.8%	7.7%	23.2%	26.1%	-	13.2%	6.6%	-	10.3%	11.8%
Out-degree centralization	3.9%	30.8%	80.8%	14.0%	35.7%	57.4%	-	20.9%	83.5%	-	16.5%	18.1%
E-I index	− 0.852	− 0.857	− 0.429	− 0.846	− 0.818	− 0.751	-	− 1	− 0.333	-	− 0.333	− 0.894

^aWe only asked about the existence of any types of relations prior to the SCOPE, so we did not calculate the frequency of communication or collaborations

ISSN: 2662-2211