Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32524169›Full record

ReviewSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2020

Understanding loneliness in the twenty-first century: an update on correlates, risk factors, and potential solutions.

Michelle H Lim, Robert Eres, Shradha Vasan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 163 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
163citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
26.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

163 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 415 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Are social isolation, lack of social support or loneliness risk factors for cardiovascular disease in Australia and New Zealand? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2022
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

103 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michelle H LimIverson Health Innovation Research Institute, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, 3122, Australia. mlim@swin.edu.au.
Robert EresIverson Health Innovation Research Institute, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, 3122, Australia.
Shradha VasanIverson Health Innovation Research Institute, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, 3122, Australia.
Swinburne University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLoneliness is increasingly recognised as the next critical public health issue. A plausible reason for this concern may be related to emerging societal trends affecting the way we relate, communicate, and function in our social environment. In 2006, a prominent review of the clinical significance of loneliness was published. However, there has not been a comprehensive update on known and emerging risk factors and correlates of loneliness since then. Furthermore, there is no conceptual model that has been developed to better account for the complexity of loneliness and to inform the development of evidence-based solutions as we challenge the issues of the twenty-first century.

methodsWe reviewed the current literature to identify either known or emerging risk factors and correlates of loneliness since 2006. This includes new or known evidence on: (1) demography; (2) health, including physical health; mental health; cognitive health; brain, biology, and genetics; and (3) socio-environmental factors including digital communication and the workplace.

resultsWe synthesized the literature according to a new proposed conceptual model of loneliness which showed the interplay between known and emerging correlates and risk factors from demography, health, to socio-environmental factors. In the conceptual model of loneliness, we illustrated how solutions can be delivered and tailored to an individual based on their life circumstances and preferences.

conclusionWe concluded by making specific recommendations in advancing our scientific understanding of loneliness. Our knowledge can only be deepened if we increase scientific rigour via accounting for confounding variables and using longitudinal, multi-disciplinary, and multiple methodologies in research. We also call for the rigorous evaluation of programs targeting loneliness.

Indexed as

Social EnvironmentCommunicationHumansLonelinessMental HealthPublic HealthRisk FactorsLonelinessMental healthPhysical healthSocial neuroscienceSolutions

Identifiers

PMID32524169
OpenAlexW3033485693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.