22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Loneliness and mood disorders: consequence, cause and/or unholy alliance?

      Current Opinion in Psychiatry
      Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          People with persistent depressive disorders and with bipolar disorder are more likely to feel lonely than people in the general population. This evidence update focused on studies in the last 2 years, characterized by the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent social distancing directives.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A meta-analysis of interventions to reduce loneliness.

          Social and demographic trends are placing an increasing number of adults at risk for loneliness, an established risk factor for physical and mental illness. The growing costs of loneliness have led to a number of loneliness reduction interventions. Qualitative reviews have identified four primary intervention strategies: (a) improving social skills, (b) enhancing social support, (c) increasing opportunities for social contact, and (d) addressing maladaptive social cognition. An integrative meta-analysis of loneliness reduction interventions was conducted to quantify the effects of each strategy and to examine the potential role of moderator variables. Results revealed that single-group pre-post and nonrandomized comparison studies yielded larger mean effect sizes relative to randomized comparison studies. Among studies that used the latter design, the most successful interventions addressed maladaptive social cognition. This is consistent with current theories regarding loneliness and its etiology. Theoretical and methodological issues associated with designing new loneliness reduction interventions are discussed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Associations between loneliness and perceived social support and outcomes of mental health problems: a systematic review

            Background The adverse effects of loneliness and of poor perceived social support on physical health and mortality are established, but no systematic synthesis is available of their relationship with the outcomes of mental health problems over time. In this systematic review, we aim to examine the evidence on whether loneliness and closely related concepts predict poor outcomes among adults with mental health problems. Methods We searched six databases and reference lists for longitudinal quantitative studies that examined the relationship between baseline measures of loneliness and poor perceived social support and outcomes at follow up. Thirty-four eligible papers were retrieved. Due to heterogeneity among included studies in clinical populations, predictor measures and outcomes, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Results We found substantial evidence from prospective studies that people with depression who perceive their social support as poorer have worse outcomes in terms of symptoms, recovery and social functioning. Loneliness has been investigated much less than perceived social support, but there is some evidence that greater loneliness predicts poorer depression outcome. There is also some preliminary evidence of associations between perceived social support and outcomes in schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and anxiety disorders. Conclusions Loneliness and quality of social support in depression are potential targets for development and testing of interventions, while for other conditions further evidence is needed regarding relationships with outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12888-018-1736-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Loneliness in the general population: prevalence, determinants and relations to mental health

              Background While loneliness has been regarded as a risk to mental and physical health, there is a lack of current community data covering a broad age range. This study used a large and representative German adult sample to investigate loneliness. Methods Baseline data of the Gutenberg Health Study (GHS) collected between April 2007 and April 2012 (N = 15,010; 35–74 years), were analyzed. Recruitment for the community-based, prospective, observational cohort study was performed in equal strata for gender, residence and age decades. Measures were provided by self-report and interview. Loneliness was used as a predictor for distress (depression, generalized anxiety, and suicidal ideation) in logistic regression analyses adjusting for sociodemographic variables and mental distress. Results A total of 10.5% of participants reported some degree of loneliness (4.9% slight, 3.9% moderate and 1.7% severely distressed by loneliness). Loneliness declined across age groups. Loneliness was stronger in women, in participants without a partner, and in those living alone and without children. Controlling for demographic variables and other sources of distress loneliness was associated with depression (OR = 1.91), generalized anxiety (OR = 1.21) and suicidal ideation (OR = 1.35). Lonely participants also smoked more and visited physicians more frequently. Conclusions The findings support the view that loneliness poses a significant health problem for a sizeable part of the population with increased risks in terms of distress (depression, anxiety), suicidal ideation, health behavior and health care utilization.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Current Opinion in Psychiatry
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                0951-7367
                1473-6578
                2023
                January 2023
                October 20 2022
                : 36
                : 1
                : 47-53
                Article
                10.1097/YCO.0000000000000832
                36449731
                395e782f-6e20-45e2-bc66-305bc2ac57c2
                © 2022
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article