Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37432730›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

Remote Communication and Loneliness During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study.

Yuki Arakawa, Kosuke Inoue, Daisuke Nishioka, Atsushi Nakagomi, Takahiro Tabuchi, Naoki Kondo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Yuki ArakawaDepartment of Social Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4571-9206
Kosuke InoueDepartment of Social Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-9614-8103
Daisuke NishiokaDepartment of Social Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3116-1195
Atsushi NakagomiDepartment of Social Preventive Medical Sciences, Center for Preventive Medical Sciences, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3908-696X
Takahiro TabuchiCancer Control Center, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-1050-3125
Naoki KondoDepartment of Social Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6425-6844

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough remote communication technologies have been widely used to maintain connections with others against interpersonal contact restrictions and exacerbated loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is unclear whether and what types of remote communication technologies are effective in mitigating loneliness.

objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the association between remote communication and loneliness when face-to-face meetings with others were strongly prohibited and whether this association varied across types of communication tools, age, and gender.

methodsWe used cross-sectional data from the Japan COVID-19 and Society Internet Survey conducted from August to September 2020. From registered panelists of the research agency, 28,000 randomly sampled participants completed the survey on the website. We created 2 study cohorts who stopped meeting with family members living apart and friends during the pandemic. We categorized whether participants had technology-based remote communication (voice calling, text messaging, and video calling) with family and friends. Loneliness was assessed using the 3-item University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale. We used a modified Poisson regression model to investigate the association between loneliness and remote communication with family members living apart or friends. We also conducted subgroup analyses based on age and gender.

resultsA total of 4483 participants stopped meeting with family members living apart, and 6783 participants stopped meeting with friends during the COVID-19 pandemic. Remote communication with family members living apart did not show an association with loneliness, whereas remote communication with friends was associated with a low prevalence of loneliness (family: adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR]=0.89, 95% CI 0.74-1.08; P=.24 and friends: aPR=0.82, 95% CI 0.73-0.91; P<.001). From analyses by tools, voice calling was associated with low loneliness (family: aPR=0.88, 95% CI 0.78-0.98; P=.03 and friends: aPR=0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95; P=.003). Similarly, text messaging was associated with low loneliness (family: aPR=0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.97; P=.02 and friends: aPR=0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89; P<.001). However, we did not find an association between video calling and loneliness (family: aPR=0.88, 95% CI 0.75-1.02; P=.09 and friends: aPR=0.94, 95% CI 0.85-1.04; P=.25). Text messaging with friends was associated with low loneliness regardless of age, whereas voice calling with family or friends was associated with low loneliness only among participants aged ≥65 years. An association between remote communication with friends and low loneliness was found regardless of the type of remote communication tool among men, whereas it was found only for text messaging with friends among women.

conclusionsIn this cross-sectional study of adults in Japan, remote communication, especially via voice calling and text messaging, was associated with low loneliness. Promoting remote communication may reduce loneliness when face-to-face contact is restricted, which should be the subject of future research.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsAdultAgedCommunicationCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLonelinessMaleagecommunication toolCOVID-19genderICTinformation and communications technologylonelinessremote communicationrestrictionssocial isolationtext message

Identifiers

PMID37432730
PMCPMC10369164

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.