Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40952738›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Global Trends and Disparities in Social Isolation.

Thomas E Fuller-Rowell, Samia Sultana, Ichiro Kawachi

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Error in Key Points.JAMA network open · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Thomas E Fuller-RowellDepartment of Human Development and Family Science, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama.
Samia SultanaDepartment of Human Development and Family Science, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama.
Ichiro KawachiDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Social isolation is consequential for human health and well-being. However, global trends and trends across countries, regions, and socioeconomic strata remain inadequately characterized, limiting targeted policy responses. Objectives: To quantify global changes in social isolation from 2009 to 2024 across within-country income groups and evaluate cross-country and regional variation in isolation levels and trends. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from 2009 to 2024 from the Gallup World Poll, a globally representative repeated cross-sectional survey with consistent methodology across more than 150 countries. A random sample of approximately 1000 adults (age ≥15 years) within each country was selected at each annual assessment. Global trends in isolation were examined for the full sample and for top and bottom income groups, defined within each country. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prevalence of social isolation at each time point within each country was assessed as the proportion of respondents who answered "no" to having relatives or friends available to help in times of trouble. Household income was assessed in local currency and coded into 5 quintiles. Results: The study findings are based on data from 2 483 935 person-level assessments (mean [SD] age, 41.7 [17.9] years; 53.1% women) across 16 time points and 159 countries. Prepandemic global mean isolation levels were stable. A marked increase in isolation occurred between 2019 and 2020, concurrent with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and was disproportionately seen in lower-income groups (β = 2.6 percentage points [95% CI, 0.9-4.4 percentage points]; P = .003; an 11.0% increase). From 2020 to 2024, isolation continued to increase, with steeper increases among higher-income groups (β = 1.9 [95% CI, 0.7-3.1]; P < .001; a 12.3% increase). The global prevalence of social isolation increased by 13.4% from 2009 to 2024 (from 19.2% [95% CI, 17.3%-21.6%] to 21.8% [95% CI, 19.4%-24.2%]), with the entire increase occurring after 2019. The disparity in isolation prevalence between high- and low-income groups peaked in 2020: 26.4% (95% CI, 23.6%-29.2%) of lower income groups were isolated vs 15.6% (95% CI, 13.6%-17.7%) of higher income groups. By 2024, global isolation was 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 0.7-4.5 percentage points) above prepandemic levels and the income disparity was 8.6 percentage points (95% CI, 5.1-12.1 percentage points). A total of 54 countries experienced worsening isolation and widening disparities, while 41 saw improvements. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, social isolation was found to have increased globally after the COVID-19 pandemic, with the initial increase disproportionately seen in lower-income populations and subsequent increases broadening across socioeconomic strata. Targeted interventions for vulnerable groups and research examining country-level policies are urgently needed to mitigate high isolation levels and reduce inequities.

Indexed as

Global HealthSocial IsolationAdolescentAdultCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansIncomeMaleMiddle AgedSARS-CoV-2Socioeconomic FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40952738
PMCPMC12439063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.