ArticleBMJ open2022
Barriers and facilitators of digital interventions use to reduce loneliness among older adults: a protocol for a qualitative systematic review.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of artificial agents in loneliness alleviation among older adults: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Digital exclusion and loneliness in older people: panel data analysis of three longitudinal cohort studies.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDigital interventions are considered as a potential solution to loneliness in older adults. However, this type of intervention has had limited acceptance among older adults (aged ≥60 years). To ensure the use of digital interventions in older adults, possible barriers and facilitating factors should be better understood from the user's perspective. We aim to systematically examine the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of digital interventions designed to reduce loneliness in older adults by identifying, evaluating and synthesising qualitative studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search of qualitative studies for barriers and facilitators for use of digital interventions will be conducted in the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Studies reported in English will be considered for this review. Grey literature will not be included. Two reviewers (HZ and XL) will independently screen the literatures, and any differences will be solved by turning to the third reviewer (JN). The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Qualitative Research Critical Appraisal Checklist will be used by two reviewers to independently assess the validity of the methods used. Relevant data about the populations, context, culture, geographical location, study methods and barriers and facilitators to the implementation of digital interventions will be extracted using the JBI standardised data extraction tool. JBI meta-aggregation methods will be implemented to synthesise the data, which will generate themes and categories based on the data. The final synthesis will establish confidence levels using the JBI ConQual approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol does not require ethical approval. The data are based on published scientific databases. The results will be disseminated through journal articles and scientific conference presentations (if feasible). PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022328609.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.