Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40524124›Full record

SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2025

An Updated Systematic Literature Review of the Economic Costs of Loneliness and Social Isolation and the Cost Effectiveness of Interventions.

Lidia Engel, Muhammad Fikru Rizal, Sharon Clifford, Jan Faller, Michelle H Lim, Long Khanh-Dao Le, Mary Lou Chatterton, Cathrine Mihalopoulos

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

8 authors.

Lidia EngelFaculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. lidia.engel@monash.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7959-3149
Muhammad Fikru RizalFaculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0064-3255
Sharon CliffordFaculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9031-2504
Jan FallerFaculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7645-2079
Michelle H LimPrevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4136-5909
Long Khanh-Dao LeFaculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9442-6824
Mary Lou ChattertonFaculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4902-9448
Cathrine MihalopoulosFaculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7127-9462

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 2024805
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere has been growing interest in understanding the economic impacts of loneliness and social isolation. This study updates a previous review on the economic costs of loneliness and social isolation and the cost effectiveness of related interventions.

methodsWe conducted a systematic search in the MEDLINE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Embase databases from 2018 to 13 August 2024, supplemented by a search of the grey literature. Studies included cost-of-illness studies, economic evaluations, and social return on investment (SROI) analyses published in the English language. All studies were evaluated for quality and summarised using a narrative approach. Costs reported were converted into US$, year 2024 values.

resultsIn total, 15 studies were included: six cost-of-illness studies, four economic evaluations, and five SROI studies. Cost-of-illness studies primarily examined healthcare and productivity costs. All but one study reported excess costs linked to loneliness and social isolation, ranging from US$2 billion to US$25.2 billion per annum. Among four economic evaluations, three were model-based cost-utility or cost-effectiveness analyses (targeting older adults and the general population), and one was trial based (focusing on low-income individuals with health issues). One study found an intervention cost effective, whereas cost-effectiveness probabilities in others ranged from 54% to 68%. One study concluded that an intervention to reduce severe loneliness in older adults was cost effective but unlikely to be cost saving. All SROI studies reported positive returns, with SROI ratios ranging from US$2.28 to US$13.72.

conclusionThis review highlights additional evidence on the economic burden of loneliness and social isolation. Future research should explore broader cost impacts beyond healthcare and expand cost-effectiveness studies to younger populations.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessHealth Care CostsLonelinessSocial IsolationCost-Benefit AnalysisCost-Effectiveness AnalysisHumansModels, Economic

Identifiers

PMID40524124
PMCPMC12370830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.