ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Addressing loneliness in emerging adults in primary care: a pilot feasibility study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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.
- Models, implementation, and reported outcomes of social prescribing interventions: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Loneliness among emerging adults is common and is associated with poor physical and mental health. Most loneliness interventions have not been adapted nor tested in primary care that can broadly reach this population. This study aims to pilot test the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact of two adapted interventions -cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and social prescribing (SP) - on reducing loneliness in emerging adults in primary care. Methods: Participants aged 18-25, who were seen in primary care and met the cut-off score on the UCLA-3 loneliness, were assigned to either CBT (N=6) or SP (N=9). Both group interventions were delivered virtually for five weeks. Outcomes included the 20-item UCLA loneliness scale, PHQ-9 depression, and GAD-7 anxiety. Ten qualitative interviews were conducted to understand participants' experience of the interventions and effects on their loneliness. Results: Of 15 participants (11 women, mean age = 22), 14 of them completed either intervention. Results from paired T-tests showed pre-post reductions in loneliness, depression, and anxiety for both CBT and SP interventions, though they were statistically non-significant. Four themes described participants' i) experience of loneliness, ii) changes in self and behavior, iii) barriers and facilitators to participation, and iv) suggestions for intervention adaptations. Discussions: The results suggest that it may be feasible to treat loneliness in emerging adults in primary care with adapted interventions like CBT and SP. Further research with larger sample sizes and pragmatic, randomized controlled trial designs are needed to test the effectiveness of these interventions in primary care settings.
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.