This evidence and gap map on in-person interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness across all age groups found few studies of societal-level interventions, most research was from high income countries and the available reviews were of low quality
The EGM in brief
This report discusses the effectiveness of in-person interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness in people across all ages. It emphasizes that the available evidence is not consistent and varies in support of interpersonal and community-based delivery interventions and health-related outcomes (loneliness, wellbeing, depression/anxiety), with most evidence coming from high-income countries.
What is this EGM about?
Social isolation and loneliness are becoming more significant public health issues associated with increased deaths and poorer health outcomes.
In-person interventions can help people who are at risk of feeling socially isolated and lonely by teaching them how to maintain their existing connections or form new ones. Policy makers are interested in knowing which interventions are effective in reducing social isolation and loneliness.
What is the aim of this EGM?
To present available evidence from systematic reviews and primary studies about the effects of in-person interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness across all ages and settings.
What studies are included?
The EGM included 513 articles comprising 421 primary studies and 92 systematic reviews that evaluate the effectiveness of in-person interventions for reducing social isolation and/or loneliness. The studies had to report on the effect of in-person interventions and could be conducted in any setting.
What are the main findings of this gap map?
The evidence in this EGM varies with more evidence for interpersonal and community-based delivery interventions than interventions delivered at societal levels. Most measured outcomes include health-related outcomes of loneliness, well-being, and depression/anxiety. Specifically, there are evidence clusters for community-based interventions of group activities and interpersonal delivery interventions for changing negative thinking and feelings about social relationships. Most evidence comes from high-income countries including the US, UK, and Australia, with none from low-income countries. Most systematic reviews included in this EGM are of critically low quality, with less than 5% of high or moderate quality.
Less than 5% of included reviews reported outcomes about how well the interventions were implemented. Only two primary studies and one review assessed interventions delivered at the societal level and only one review assessed interventions for age-friendly communities.
While all age groups were represented, more reviews and primary studies were interested in older adults (60 years or above, 63%) than young people (24 years or below, 35%). Very few described how they identified people who were at-risk and even fewer assessed whether the effects of the interventions were different for populations experiencing inequities.
What do the findings of the map mean?
This EGM is a step toward identifying effective in-person interventions for reducing social isolation and loneliness for all age groups. Though a large body of evidence exists, with much of this research from more recent years, it shows variations, with a lack of high quality reviews. The map contributes to building an evidence base in the field by which funders and researchers can identify gaps in the evidence and then address these as future research priorities.
How up-to-date is this EGM?
We searched for relevant studies up until 17 February 2022.