Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42151979›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2026

Interventions against loneliness and social isolation in older adults- a systematic review.

Johanna Bergsträsser, Teresa Schmahl, Jost Steinhäuser, Katja Goetz

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

4 authors.

Johanna Bergsträsser *Institute of Family Medicine, University of Luebeck , Luebeck, Germany.
Teresa Schmahl *Institute of Family Medicine, University of Luebeck , Luebeck, Germany. teresa.schmahl@uni-luebeck.de.
Jost SteinhäuserInstitute of Family Medicine, University of Luebeck , Luebeck, Germany.
Katja GoetzInstitute of Family Medicine, University of Luebeck , Luebeck, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLoneliness is a growing health and social challenge. The COVID-19 pandemic boosted feelings of loneliness for many people. To combat loneliness, a wide range of interventions have been developed and evaluated for their efficacy and effectiveness. As a result, many new interventions to alleviate loneliness have been developed, especially technological interventions. Therefore, the objective of this study was to conduct a comprehensive and up-to-date systematic review to identify interventions aimed at loneliness and social isolation among adults, 60 years and older published during or post-pandemic.

methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted for studies between 2020 and 2024 across five online databases: MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Title and abstract screening, critical appraisal of the studies, and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. A narrative approach was adopted to assess and integrate the diverse findings from the research.

resultsUltimately, 79 studies were included in this systematic review. The results are structured based on the categorization of the interventions, which includes differentiation between analogue interventions, technological interventions and multicomponent (analogue and technological) interventions. The effectiveness of analogue interventions, particularly community-based interventions such as group meetings, social participation programs, and educational or psychological interventions, tended to be superior to that of technological interventions.

conclusionsThe combination of analogue and technological interventions in particular produced promising results regarding a decrease of loneliness. Specific interventions must be tailored to the target group and setting and regularly reevaluated. The aim now should be to implement these interventions comprehensively and monitor their effectiveness over several years. Future research should focus on differentiating the circumstances under which various forms of intervention are effective.

trial registrationPROSPERO systematic review registration: CRD42024538755.

Indexed as

COVID-19LonelinessSocial IsolationAgedHumansMiddle AgedPandemicsSARS-CoV-2AgeingCOVID-19InterventionLonelinessOlder adultsSocial isolationSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42151979
PMCPMC13182138

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.