ArticlePloS one2025
The various effect of social isolation on depression risk among old population in China during covid-19 pandemic: A population based survey.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Social Environmental Factors Associated with Depression Among Older Adults in Busan, South Korea: Based on the 2023 Korea Community Health Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the current study is to assess various effect of social isolation on depression risk among older adults during COVID-19 in China.
methodsData was obtained from the China Longitudinal Ageing Social Survey (CLASS) conducted in 2020. A total of 9883 participants were included. Depression status was assessed by 9-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Social isolation was assessed by Lubben Social Network Scale-6 (LSNS-6). The odds ratios of depression risk according to LSNS-6 categories were obtained using a logistic regression model with adjustment for potential confounding variables.
resultsThe prevalence of depression was 31.2%, and the presence of social isolation was 37.9% during the COVID-19 among older population. A decrease in depression risk was observed with reduced isolation. The odds ratio for the lowest versus highest was 0.75 (95% confidence interval: 0.63, 0.89; Ptrend = 0.012). Friend support reduced depression risk more significantly than family support. The association between LSNS-6 friend subscale and depression risk was differentiated by LSNS-6 family subscale. In men, LSNS-6 friend subscale tended to be associated with depression risk inversely when their LSNS-6 family subscale was less than 6 (interaction P = 0.041). Similar associations and stratified modifications were observed among those who lived in rural areas (interaction P = 0.002), married (interaction P = 0.003), Han (interaction P = 0.01), lived with others (interaction P = 0.001), and so on.
conclusionsMost depression cases were found to be strongly associated with social isolation during the pandemic. Our findings have provided empirical evidence for researchers to understand the association between social isolation and depression, which could help them evaluate and manage depression promptly. Because of the cross-sectional design, we cannot establish causal relationships between depression and isolation.
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.