75 research outputs found

    The De Jong Gierveld short scales for emotional and social loneliness: tested on data from 7 countries in the UN generations and gender surveys

    Get PDF
    Loneliness concerns the subjective evaluation of the situation individuals are involved in, characterized either by a number of relationships with friends and colleagues which is smaller than is considered desirable (social loneliness), as well as situations where the intimacy in confidant relationships one wishes for has not been realized (emotional loneliness). To identify people who are lonely direct questions are not sufficient; loneliness scales are preferred. In this article, the quality of the three-item scale for emotional loneliness and the three-item scale for social loneliness has been investigated for use in the following countries participating in the United Nations “Generations and Gender Surveys”: France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, Bulgaria, Georgia, and Japan. Sample sizes for the 7 countries varied between 8,158 and 12,828. Translations of the De Jong Gierveld loneliness scale have been tested using reliability and validity tests including a confirmatory factor analysis to test the two-dimensional structure of loneliness. Test outcomes indicated for each of the countries under investigation reliable and valid scales for emotional and social loneliness, respectively

    Older Adults and Information and Communication Technologies in the Global North

    Get PDF
    At all ages, people are incorporating information and communication technologies (ICTs) into their lives. It is not that they have stopped talking with each other in-person, it is that ICTs complement their interactions when they cannot be together face-to-face. Since the 1990s, email has provided a routine way to stay in touch and sustain meaningful contact over distance. But not all age groups have adopted ICTs with the same enthusiasm. Research in the Global North has consistently reported that age plays an important role in ICT adoption and use (Anderson and Perrin 2017). For example, older adults have been the least likely to use ICTs, and even when they do use ICTs, they are less active in their use (Blank and Groselji 2014; Haight, Quan-Haase, and Corbett 2014; Schreurs, Quan-Haase, and Martin 2017). Yet, this is changing. As more older adults use ICTs, analysts are wondering how such ICTs affect older adults’ social networks (Wang, Zhang and Wellman 2018; Wellman, Quan-Haase and Harper forthcoming): Are ICTs helping older adults build, maintain, or diminish personal networks? And how are they supporting or limiting the exchange of social support both for local and long-distance social networks? Moreover, are ICTs affecting different types of social ties differently—be they kin, friend, neighbor, workmate, or churchgoer; or strong or weak

    An evaluation of the effectiveness of a community mentoring service for socially isolated older people: a controlled trial

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Social isolation affects a significant proportion of older people and is associated with poor health outcomes. The current evidence base regarding the effectiveness of interventions targeting social isolation is poor, and the potential utility of mentoring for this purpose has not previously been rigorously evaluated. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a community-based mentoring service for improving mental health, social engagement and physical health for socially isolated older people.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This prospective controlled trial compared a sample of mentoring service clients (intervention group) with a matched control group recruited through general practice. One hundred and ninety five participants from each group were matched on mental wellbeing and social activity scores. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at six month follow-up. The primary outcome was the Short Form Health Survey v2 (SF-12) mental health component score (MCS). Secondary outcomes included the SF-12 physical health component score (PCS), EuroQol EQ-5D, Geriatric Depression Score (GDS-10), social activity, social support and morbidities.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found no evidence that mentoring was beneficial across a wide range of participant outcomes measuring health status, social activity and depression. No statistically significant between-group differences were observed at follow-up in the primary outcome (p = 0.48) and in most secondary outcomes. Identifying suitable matched pairs of intervention and control group participants proved challenging.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results of this trial provide no substantial evidence supporting the use of community mentoring as an effective means of alleviating social isolation in older people. Further evidence is needed on the effectiveness of community-based interventions targeting social isolation. When using non-randomised designs, there are considerable challenges in the recruitment of suitable matches from a community sample.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>SCIE Research Register for Social Care 105923</p

    Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systematic review

    Get PDF
    This is a freely-available open access publication. Please cite the published version which is available via the DOI link in this record.BACKGROUND: Targeting social isolation in older people is a growing public health concern. The proportion of older people in society has increased in recent decades, and it is estimated that approximately 25% of the population will be aged 60 or above within the next 20 to 40 years. Social isolation is prevalent amongst older people and evidence indicates the detrimental effect that it can have on health and wellbeing. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of interventions designed to alleviate social isolation and loneliness in older people. METHODS: Relevant electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, ASSIA, IBSS, PsycINFO, PubMed, DARE, Social Care Online, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL) were systematically searched using an extensive search strategy, for randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies published in English before May 2009. Additional articles were identified through citation tracking. Studies were included if they related to older people, if the intervention aimed to alleviate social isolation and loneliness, if intervention participants were compared against inactive controls and, if treatment effects were reported. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a standardised form. Narrative synthesis and vote-counting methods were used to summarise and interpret study data. RESULTS: Thirty two studies were included in the review. There was evidence of substantial heterogeneity in the interventions delivered and the overall quality of included studies indicated a medium to high risk of bias. Across the three domains of social, mental and physical health, 79% of group-based interventions and 55% of one-to-one interventions reported at least one improved participant outcome. Over 80% of participatory interventions produced beneficial effects across the same domains, compared with 44% of those categorised as non-participatory. Of interventions categorised as having a theoretical basis, 87% reported beneficial effects across the three domains compared with 59% of interventions with no evident theoretical foundation. Regarding intervention type, 86% of those providing activities and 80% of those providing support resulted in improved participant outcomes, compared with 60% of home visiting and 25% of internet training interventions. Fifty eight percent of interventions that explicitly targeted socially isolated or lonely older people reported positive outcomes, compared with 80% of studies with no explicit targeting. CONCLUSIONS: More, well-conducted studies of the effectiveness of social interventions for alleviating social isolation are needed to improve the evidence base. However, it appeared that common characteristics of effective interventions were those developed within the context of a theoretical basis, and those offering social activity and/or support within a group format. Interventions in which older people are active participants also appeared more likely to be effective. Future interventions incorporating all of these characteristics may therefore be more successful in targeting social isolation in older people.National Institute for Health Researc

    A systematic review evaluating the psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Improving social inclusion opportunities for population health has been identified as a priority area for international policy. There is a need to comprehensively examine and evaluate the quality of psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion that are used to guide social policy and outcomes. Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the literature on all current measures of social inclusion for any population group, to evaluate the quality of the psychometric properties of identified measures, and to evaluate if they capture the construct of social inclusion. Methods: A systematic search was performed using five electronic databases: CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, ERIC and Pubmed and grey literature were sourced to identify measures of social inclusion. The psychometric properties of the social inclusion measures were evaluated against the COSMIN taxonomy of measurement properties using pre-set psychometric criteria. Results: Of the 109 measures identified, twenty-five measures, involving twenty-five studies and one manual met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of the reviewed measures was variable, with the Social and Community Opportunities Profile-Short, Social Connectedness Scale and the Social Inclusion Scale demonstrating the strongest evidence for sound psychometric quality. The most common domain included in the measures was connectedness (21), followed by participation (19); the domain of citizenship was covered by the least number of measures (10). No single instrument measured all aspects within the three domains of social inclusion. Of the measures with sound psychometric evidence, the Social and Community Opportunities Profile-Short captured the construct of social inclusion best. Conclusions: The overall quality of the psychometric properties demonstrate that the current suite of available instruments for the measurement of social inclusion are promising but need further refinement. There is a need for a universal working definition of social inclusion as an overarching construct for ongoing research in the area of the psychometric properties of social inclusion instruments
    corecore