Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38834606›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2024

The impact of social isolation and loneliness on cardiovascular disease risk factors: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and bibliometric investigation.

Osama Albasheer, Siddig Ibrahim Abdelwahab, Mohammad R Zaino, Ahmed Abdallah Ahmed Altraifi, Nasser Hakami, Ehab I El-Amin, Mohammed M Alshehri, Saeed M Alghamdi, Abdulfattah S Alqahtani, Aqeel M Alenazi and 5 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Mental stress as a trigger of cardiovascular events: A narrative review.European journal of clinical investigation · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. 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

15 authors.

Osama AlbasheerFamily and Community Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, College of Medicine, Jazan University, 45142, Jazan, Saudi Arabia. oalbasheer@jazanu.edu.sa.
Siddig Ibrahim AbdelwahabHealth Research Centre, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammad R ZainoPhysical Therapy Department, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed Abdallah Ahmed AltraifiObstetrics and Gynaecology Department, College of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Nasser HakamiSurgical Department, College of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Ehab I El-AminDepartment of Epidemiology, College of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammed M AlshehriDepartment of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Saeed M AlghamdiClinical Technology Department, Respiratory Care Program, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulfattah S AlqahtaniDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Aqeel M AlenaziHealth and Rehabilitation Sciences, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Bader AlqahtaniHealth and Rehabilitation Sciences, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed AlhowimelHealth and Rehabilitation Sciences, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Shadab UddinDepartment of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Husam Eldin Elsawi KhalafallaDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Isameldin E MedaniObstetrics and Gynaecology Department, College of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data on the association between social isolation, loneliness, and risk of incident coronary heart disease (CVD) are conflicting. The objective of this study is to determine the relationship between social isolation and loneliness, and the risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) in middle age and elderly using meta-analysis. The purpose of the bibliometric analysis is to systematically evaluate the existing literature on the relationship between social isolation, loneliness, and the risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) in middle-aged and elderly individuals. A comprehensive search through four electronic databases (MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science) was conducted for published articles that determined the association between social isolation and/or loneliness and the risk of developing coronary heart disease from June 2015 to May 2023. Two independent reviewers reviewed the titles and abstracts of the records. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline to conduct the systematic review and meta-analysis. Data for the bibliometric analysis was obtained from the Scopus database and analyzed using VOSviewer and Bibliometrix applications. Six studies involving 104,511 patients were included in the final qualitative review and meta-analysis after screening the records. The prevalence of loneliness ranged from 5 to 65.3%, and social isolation ranged from 2 to 56.5%. A total of 5073 cardiovascular events were recorded after follow-up, ranging between 4 and 13 years. Poor social relationships were associated with a 16% increase in the risk of incident CVD (Hazard Ratio of new CVD when comparing high versus low loneliness or social isolation was 1.16 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.10-1.22). The bibliometric analysis shows a rapidly growing field (9.77% annual growth) with common collaboration (6.37 co-authors/document, 26.53% international). The US leads research output, followed by the UK and Australia. Top institutions include University College London, Inserm, and the University of Glasgow. Research focuses on "elderly," "cardiovascular disease," and "psychosocial stress," with recent trends in "mental health," "social determinants," and "COVID-19". Social isolation and loneliness increase the risk of and worsen outcomes in incident cardiovascular diseases. However, the observed effect estimate is small, and this may be attributable to residual confounding from incomplete measurement of potentially confounding or mediating factors. The results of the bibliometric analysis highlight the multidimensional nature of CVD research, covering factors such as social, psychological, and environmental determinants, as well as their interplay with various demographic and health-related variables.

Indexed as

BibliometricsCardiovascular DiseasesLonelinessSocial IsolationAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsBibliometricsCardiovascular diseaseLonelinessMeta-analysisSocial healthSocial isolation

Identifiers

PMID38834606
PMCPMC11150510

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.