Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41315965›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2025

Analysing comfort with primary care discussions and openness to social prescribing as mediators of the associations between loneliness and wellbeing among Canadians aged 55 and older.

Daniel R Y Gan, Vivian Welch, Paul Hébert, Michelle Nelson, Kate Mulligan, Adam S Hoverman, Sandra Allison, Grace Park, Kiffer G Card

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Daniel R Y GanFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.
Vivian WelchBruyère Health Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Paul HébertBruyère Health Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Michelle NelsonDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Kate MulliganDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Adam S HovermanFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Sandra AllisonFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Grace ParkFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Kiffer G CardFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. kcard@sfu.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAddressing the complex health and wellbeing challenges of older adults is a critical public health priority as populations age. Social Prescribing (SP) represents a promising strategy, connecting patients to non-clinical, community-based resources to enhance physical, mental, and social wellbeing.

methodsTo develop a SP theory of change, this study used cross-sectional data from 2,450 community-dwelling older adults who participated in a population survey. Factor analyses identified four factors of comfort with primary care discussions (general, mental, physical, and social wellness) and three factors of openness to SP (effectiveness, meaningfulness, and supportiveness). Path analysis was conducted for each set of mediators separately.

resultsPath analyses revealed that comfort with primary care discussions about social wellness (β = 0.08**) is associated with better wellbeing. People who report social loneliness are most comfortable with primary care discussions about general wellness (β = - 0.17***) and least comfortable with primary care discussions about mental wellness (β = - 0.24***), whereas people who report emotional loneliness are more likely to have similar levels of comfort to discuss general wellness and mental wellness (β = - 0.18***; - 0.18***). In addition, social loneliness is associated with less comfort with primary care discussions about social wellness (β = - 0.19***) and mental wellness (β = - 0.19***), whereas association is not found for emotional loneliness. These suggest that addressing the SP needs of people who experience emotional loneliness requires a different strategy. Reporting emotional loneliness is associated with expressing support for SP (β = 0.14***), which may be key to improving wellbeing (β = 0.10***) among this population. Overall, social loneliness has a total effect size of β

conclusionsWhile SP may be acceptable to those who need it, some may experience greater difficulties accessing SP through primary care providers without interventions tailored to their loneliness status that could elicit buy-in and enrolment. Primary care providers may wish to pay closer attention to people with emotional loneliness. Other considerations, such as trust and motivational interviewing for positive self-beliefs may explain potential changes from loneliness to wellbeing.

Indexed as

LonelinessPrimary Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overCanadaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMental HealthMiddle AgedNorth American PeopleSocial PrescribingSocial SupportGerontologyHealth communicationIntegrated carePublic healthSocial isolation

Identifiers

PMID41315965
PMCPMC12661800

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.