Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38693471›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2024

Addressing loneliness and social isolation in 52 countries: a scoping review of National policies.

Nina Goldman, Devi Khanna, Marie Line El Asmar, Pamela Qualter, Austen El-Osta

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Loneliness by Design: The Structural Logic of Isolation in Engagement-Driven Systems.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Self-neglect in older adults: an evolutionary concept analysis.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025
    Review
  20. What Is Social Connection in the Context of Human Need: An Interdisciplinary Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
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

5 authors.

Nina Goldman *Manchester Institute of Education, University of Manchester, Ellen Wilkinson Building, Devas Street, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom. nina.goldman@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3058-1251
Devi Khanna *Manchester Institute of Education, University of Manchester, Ellen Wilkinson Building, Devas Street, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom. devi.khanna@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9254-0869
Marie Line El AsmarNorth Hampshire Hospital, Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Basingstoke, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0733-3911
Pamela QualterManchester Institute of Education, University of Manchester, Ellen Wilkinson Building, Devas Street, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6114-3820
Austen El-OstaSchool of Public Heath, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RF, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8772-4938

Funding

Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) 214225
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEven prior to the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was ample evidence that loneliness and social isolation negatively impacted physical and mental health, employability, and are a financial burden on the state. In response, there has been significant policy-level attention on tackling loneliness. The objective of this scoping review was to conduct a loneliness policy landscape analysis across 52 countries of the UN European country groups. Our policy analysis sought to highlight commonalities and differences between the different national approaches to manage loneliness, with the goal to provide actionable recommendations for the consideration of policymakers wishing to develop, expand or review existing loneliness policies.

methodsWe searched governmental websites using the Google search engine for publicly available documents related to loneliness and social isolation. Seventy-eight documents were identified in total, from which 23 documents were retained. Exclusion of documents was based on predetermined criteria. A structured content analysis approach was used to capture key information from the policy documents. Contextual data were captured in a configuration matrix to highlight common and unique themes.

resultsWe could show that most policies describe loneliness as a phenomenon that was addressed to varying degrees in different domains such as social, health, geographical, economic and political. Limited evidence was found regarding funding for suggested interventions. We synthesised actionable recommendations for the consideration of policy makers focusing on the use of language, prioritisation of interventions, revisiting previous campaigns, sharing best practice across borders, setting out a vision, evaluating interventions, and the need for the rapid and sustainable scalability of interventions.

conclusionsOur study provides the first overview of the national loneliness policy landscape, highlighting the increasing prioritisation of loneliness and social isolation as a major public health and societal issue. Our findings suggest that policymakers can sustain this momentum and strengthen their strategies by incorporating rigorous, evidence-based intervention evaluations and fostering international collaborations for knowledge sharing. We believe that policymakers can more effectively address loneliness by directing funds to develop and implement interventions that impact the individual, the community and society.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PolicyLonelinessSocial IsolationEuropeHumansEuropeLonelinessPolicy analysisPolicy recommendationReviewSocial isolation

Identifiers

PMID38693471
PMCPMC11061917

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.