Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35353850›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Loneliness during COVID-19: Development and influencing factors.

Charikleia Lampraki, Adar Hoffman, Angélique Roquet, Daniela S Jopp

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
13.2field-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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Why friendship and loneliness affect our health.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. COVID-19 impacts in Northernmost Finland.International journal of circumpolar health · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Risk factors for loneliness: A literature review.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2023
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Charikleia LamprakiInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-4565-7498
Adar HoffmanInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Angélique RoquetInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Daniela S JoppInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
FORS – Swiss Centre of Expertise in the Social Sciences · CHUniversity of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In early pandemic waves, when vaccination against COVID-19 was not yet an option, distancing and reduced social contact were the most effective measures to slow down the pandemic. Changes in frequency and forms of social contact have reduced the spread of the COVID-19 virus and thus saved lives, yet there is increasing evidence for negative side effects such as mental health issues. In the present study, we investigate the development of loneliness and its predictors to examine the role of changes in social networks due to social distancing and other COVID-19-related life changes. A total of 737 participants (age range = 18-81 years) completed an online survey in three waves during the last quarter of 2020 at one-month intervals. Latent growth and multilevel modeling revealed that emotional loneliness increased over time, while social loneliness remained stable. Moreover, socially lonely individuals were likely to also develop emotional loneliness over time. Increased social distancing and sanitary measures were accompanied by decreased social interactions and loss of individuals considered SOS contacts and confidants. Changes in specific social network indicators were differentially associated with changes in emotional vs social loneliness: Loss of friends considered confidants was associated with increasing emotional loneliness, whereas loss of friends considered SOS contacts and reduced overall social interactions were related to increasing social loneliness. Lastly, individuals with more family-and-friend SOS contacts, more friends as confidants and an overall higher number of social interactions were more protected from feeling socially or emotionally lonely. Study findings enhance the understanding of underlying mechanisms differentially contributing to social and emotional loneliness and offer practical suggestions to reduce mental-health side effects of social distancing.

Indexed as

COVID-19LonelinessChildChild, PreschoolHumansInfantPhysical DistancingSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35353850
PMCPMC8967032
OpenAlexW4220837582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.