ArticleScientific reports2025
Understanding the interplay between social isolation, age, and loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Area Between Trajectories: Insights into Optimal Group Selection and Trajectory Heterogeneity in Group-Based Trajectory Modeling.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2026Article
- Patterns of Living Alone in South Korea Compared to Other Countries: A Public Health Perspective and YouTube Topic Modeling Analysis.International journal of public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies indicate differences in experiences of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic but are constricted by limited timeframes and absence of key risk factors. This study explores temporal and inter-individual variations of loneliness in Canadians over the pandemic's first year (April 2020-2021), by identifying loneliness trajectories. It then seeks to provide information about groups overrepresented in high and persistent loneliness trajectories by examining their associations with risk factors: social isolation indicators (living alone, adherence to health measures limiting in-person contacts, and online contacts), young adultood, and the interactions between these factors. Data comes from a large longitudinal study with a representative Canadian sample (n = 1763) and 11 measurement times. Analyses consist of (1) a group-based modelling approach to identify trajectories of loneliness and (2) multinomial logistic regressions to test associations between risk factors and trajectory membership. Varied experiences of loneliness during the pandemic were revealed as five trajectories were identified: moderate-unstable (38.5%), high-stable (26.7%), low-unstable (20.5%), very low-stable (8.6%), and very high-decreasing (5.7%). Individuals living alone associated with higher trajectories. Contrary to our expectations, adhering to social distancing measures and having fewer online contacts associated with lower trajectories. Age and interactions were not significant in regard to loneliness trajectories.
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.