ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Loneliness and emotional support helpline use in Spain: a 20-year observational study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Emotional support helplines provide low-threshold assistance to people experiencing psychological distress, yet long-term evidence on reasons for contact remains limited in Spain. This study aimed to describe the distribution of psychological motives for contacting Teléfono de la Esperanza between 2004 and 2023, with particular attention to loneliness, and to examine temporal, sex-, and age-related patterns. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study using anonymized routine registry data from the International Association Teléfono de la Esperanza (ASITES). The dataset included 2,194,175 contact records registered between 2004 and 2023. Descriptive analyses summarized annual volume, caller characteristics, and primary presenting problems. Annual proportions were calculated to examine temporal patterns. Associations between caller characteristics and selected primary presenting motive were examined using multinomial logistic regression, with loneliness/communication difficulties as the reference outcome category and sex, age group, and calendar year entered simultaneously as predictors. Adjusted odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals, and model-based adjusted predicted probabilities were reported. Results: Contact volume increased over time, reaching its highest levels in 2021-2023. Most contacts were by telephone, and most callers were women (67.1%); age distribution was concentrated in midlife. Loneliness/communication difficulties was the most frequent primary presenting problem among the selected motives examined (10.1%), followed by depressed mood (7.2%) and anxiety-related problems (7.0%). In the multinomial model, age group showed the largest contribution to model fit. Adjusted predicted probabilities showed a strong age gradient for loneliness/communication difficulties, increasing from 15.75% among contacts aged ≤18 years to 77.44% among those aged ≥76 years. In contrast, suicidality-related motives were concentrated in younger groups. Men had higher adjusted relative odds of suicidal ideation and suicidal crisis than women, whereas women had higher relative representation of depressed mood and grief/bereavement. Conclusion: Helpline contact records reflect distinct age-, sex-, and time-related patterns of distress. Loneliness emerged as a major reason for contact, particularly in later life, supporting the value of helplines as an accessible public mental health resource and as a potential gateway for targeted prevention and referral strategies.
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.