Developing a new conceptual framework of meaningful interaction for understanding social isolation and loneliness

Academic debate about social isolation and loneliness, and their adverse health and well-being implications, has resulted in many policy and programme interventions directed towards reducing both, especially among older people. However, definitions of the two concepts, their measurement, and the relationship between the two are not clearly articulated. This article redresses this and draws on theoretical constructs adapted from symbolic interactionism, together with the Good Relations Measurement Framework, developed for the Equality and Human Rights Commission in the UK, to challenge the way in which social isolation and loneliness are currently understood. It argues for a need to understand experiences of social relationships, particularly those which facilitate meaningful interaction, suggesting that opportunities and barriers to meaningful interaction are determined by wider societal issues. This is set out in a new conceptual framework which can be applied across the life course and facilitates a new discourse for understanding these challenging concepts

Subtle binocular vision anomalies in migraine

A literature review reveals old references to an association between migraine headache and binocular vision anomalies, but a lack of scientific evidence evaluating these claims. In a masked case control study, we investigated binocular vision using standard clinical tests in people with migraine and in controls. Some test results suggest that heterophoria and fixation disparity are more common in the migraine group. The migraine group also had slightly reduced stereopsis. We found significant correlations between some migraine variables and some binocular vision variables (e.g., duration of worst headache and impaired stereopsis) but our analyses do not suggest that a causal relationship is likely. In conclusion, people with migraine have on average a slightly higher prevalence of heterophoria and aligning prism, and reduced stereopsis compared with controls. However, the differences are subtle and our data do not support the use of binocular vision interventions prescribed solely on the basis of the presence of migraine