Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38024780›Full record

ArticleCampbell systematic reviews2023

Digital interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness in older adults: An evidence and gap map.

Vivian Welch, Elizabeth T Ghogomu, Victoria I Barbeau, Sierra Dowling, Rebecca Doyle, Ella Beveridge, Elisabeth Boulton, Payaam Desai, Jimmy Huang, Nour Elmestekawy and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Campbell systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Vivian WelchMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Elizabeth T GhogomuBruyère Research Institute University of Ottawa Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Victoria I BarbeauMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Sierra DowlingMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Rebecca DoyleLakehead University Thunder Bay Ontario Canada.
Ella BeveridgeMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Elisabeth BoultonSchool of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work University of Manchester Manchester UK.
Payaam DesaiMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Jimmy HuangMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Nour ElmestekawyMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Tarannum HussainMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Arpana WadhwaniMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Sabrina BoutinCanadian Red Cross Montreal Quebec Canada.
Niobe HaitasCanadian Red Cross Montreal Quebec Canada.
Dylan KnealeSocial Science Research Unit, EPPI-Centre, UCL Institute of Education University College London London UK.
Douglas M SalzwedelDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology and Therapeutics University of British Columbia Vancouver British Columbia Canada.
Roger SimardCanadian Red Cross Montreal Quebec Canada.
Paul HébertBruyère Research Institute University of Ottawa Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Christopher MiktonWorld Health Organization Geneva Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Social isolation and loneliness are more common in older adults and are associated with a serious impact on their well-being, mental health, physical health, and longevity. They are a public health concern highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, hence the need for digital technology tools to enable remotely delivered interventions to alleviate the impact of social isolation and loneliness during the COVID-19 restrictions. Objectives: To map available evidence on the effects of digital interventions to mitigate social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults in all settings except hospital settings. Search Methods: We searched the following databases from inception to May 16, 2021, with no language restrictions. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, Web of Science via Clarivate, ProQuest (all databases), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) via ProQuest, EBSCO (all databases except CINAHL), Global Index Medicus, and Epistemonikos. Selection Criteria: Titles and abstracts and full text of potentially eligible articles were independently screened in duplicate following the eligibility criteria. Data Collection and Analysis: We developed and pilot tested a data extraction code set in Eppi-Reviewer and data were individually extracted and coded based on an intervention-outcome framework which was also used to define the dimensions of the evidence and gap map. Main Results: We included 200 articles (103 primary studies and 97 systematic reviews) that assessed the effects of digital interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults. Most of the systematic reviews (72%) were classified as critically low quality, only 2% as high quality and 25% were published since the COVID-19 pandemic. The evidence is unevenly distributed with clusters predominantly in high-income countries and none in low-income countries. The most common interventions identified are digital interventions to enhance social interactions with family and friends and the community via videoconferencing and telephone calls. Digital interventions to enhance social support, particularly socially assistive robots, and virtual pets were also common. Most interventions focused on reducing loneliness and depression and improving quality of life of older adults. Major gaps were identified in community level outcomes and process indicators. No included studies or reviews assessed affordability or digital divide although the value of accessibility and barriers caused by digital divide were discussed in three primary studies and three reviews. Adverse effects were reported in only two studies and six reviews. No study or review included participants from the LGBTQIA2S+ community and only one study restricted participants to 80 years and older. Very few described how at-risk populations were recruited or conducted any equity analysis to assess differences in effects for populations experiencing inequities across PROGRESS-Plus categories. Authors' Conclusions: The restrictions placed on people during the pandemic have shone a spotlight onto social isolation and loneliness, particularly for older adults. This evidence and gap map shows available evidence on the effectiveness of digital interventions for reducing social isolation or loneliness in older adults. Although the evidence is relatively large and recent, it is unevenly distributed and there is need for more high-quality research. This map can guide researchers and funders to consider areas of major gaps as priorities for further research.

Identifiers

PMID38024780
PMCPMC10681039

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.