ArticlePublic health2023
The relationship between loneliness and healthy aging indicators in Brazil (ELSI-Brazil) and England (ELSA): sex differences.
Article in Public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of Prediction Models for Healthy Ageing in Community-Dwelling Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Longitudinal Study Using Machine Learning.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2025Article
- Relationships of social isolation and loneliness with healthy aging among older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Gender differences in advanced activities of daily living: evidence from the longitudinal study of health and aging in Mexico 2012-2018.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Aerobic Fitness as an Important Moderator Risk Factor for Loneliness in Physically Trained Older People: An Explanatory Case Study Using Machine Learning.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Differences in determinants of active aging between older Brazilian and English adults: ELSI-Brazil and ELSA.Cadernos de saude publica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to estimate five harmonized healthy aging indicators covering functional ability and intrinsic capacity among older women and men from Brazil and England and evaluate their association with loneliness. STUDY
designThis was a cross-sectional study.
methodsWe used two nationally representative samples of men and women aged ≥60 years from the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSI-Brazil) wave 2 (2019-2021; n = 6929) and the English Longitudinal Study of Aging wave 9 (2018-2019; n = 5902). Healthy aging included five separate indicators (getting dressed, taking medication, managing money, cognitive function, and handgrip strength). Loneliness was measured by the 3-item University of California Loneliness Scale. Logistic regression models stratified by sex and country were performed.
resultsOverall, age-adjusted healthy aging indicators were worse in Brazil compared with England for both men and women. Considering functional ability, loneliness was negatively associated with all indicators (ranging from odds ratio [OR] = 0.26, [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13-0.52] in English men regarding the ability to take medication to OR = 0.49 [95% CI 0.27-0.89] in Brazilian women regarding the ability to manage money). Considering intrinsic capacity, loneliness was negatively associated with a higher cognitive function (OR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.55-0.95 in English women) and a higher handgrip strength (OR = 0.61; 95% CI 0.45-0.83 in Brazilian women). Lonely women demonstrated lower odds of a higher number of healthy aging indicators than men in both countries.
conclusionsCountry-specific social environments should be targeted by public policies to decrease loneliness and promote healthy aging later in life.
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.