SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2026
Effects of Psychosocial Interventions on Loneliness Amongst Long-Term Care Residents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Reviews of Psychosocial Interventions for Loneliness Among Older Adults in Community and Residential Care Settings: An Umbrella Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Ameliorating loneliness through Cognitive Stimulation Therapy and the role of baseline loneliness in predicting cognitive, behavioural and psychological benefits in people with dementia.Frontiers in psychology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLoneliness significantly affects the physical and mental health of older adults, particularly those in long-term care settings. Despite the high prevalence of loneliness, comprehensive reviews on psychosocial interventions targeting loneliness in these populations are scarce.
aimsTo evaluate the effects of psychosocial interventions in reducing loneliness among long-term care residents. STUDY
designA systematic review and meta-analysis.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search across five databases-CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, PsychINFO and The Cochrane Library-from inception to 14 February 2025. The inclusion criteria encompassed randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies and pilot studies published in English that assessed psychosocial interventions for loneliness amongst long-term care residents. The Effective Public Health Practice Project framework was utilised for the quality assessment.
resultsA total of 19 studies with 1646 participants were included. Results indicated that psychosocial interventions significantly reduced loneliness in long-term care residents. The interventions were categorised into lifestyle and leisure activities, psychological interventions, social support interventions and animal/robot-assisted interventions. Subgroup analyses revealed significant effects for lifestyle and leisure activities, group-based interventions, face-to-face delivery and interventions that less than 8 weeks.
conclusionPsychosocial interventions demonstrated a large effect size in reducing loneliness amongst long-term care residents. Interventions that incorporated lifestyle and leisure activities with a physical activity component, delivered face-to-face in group settings and lasted for less than 8 weeks may be particularly effective. IMPLICATION OF PRACTICE: This review provides updated evidence that psychosocial interventions could improve loneliness amongst residents in long-term care settings. Consequently, it offers solid information to inform policy changes and intervention strategies. REPORTING
methodThe researching results were reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis checklist. NO PATIENT OR PUBLICATION CONTRIBUTION: This study is a systematic review with meta-analysis, and such details do not apply to our work.
trial registrationThis protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (ID: CRD42024534009).
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.