Dancing with Loneliness in Later Life: A Pilot Study Mapping Seasonal Variations

Chapot, Victor; Sullivan, Mary P.; Woodbridge, Rachel; Thomas, Michael C.

doi:10.2174/1874350101508010097

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with the previous findings as regards the prevalence of loneliness, (Savikko et al 2005;Victor et al 2015), the proportion of older adults in our sample who declared feeling lonely most or some of the time was 50.5%. This was found to be particularly the case for older women, as compared to men.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Loneliness among older European adults: results from the survey of health, aging and retirement in Europe

Vozikaki

Papadaki

Linardakis

et al. 2018

J Public Health (Berl.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Previous research has suggested that individuals are mostly prone to loneliness in their later years of life due to being exposed to several risk factors typical of old age. The current study aims to examine possible demographic, health and social determinants of loneliness among older adults in Europe. Methods Data on a nationally representative sample of 5,074 Europeans aged ≥65 years were drawn from the first wave of the Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (SHARE, 2004/2005). Frequency of feelings of loneliness was examined according to adverse health conditions, stressful life events and social isolation indicators. Results Female gender, older age, lower socioeconomic status, living unpartnered, being childless and having no activity involvement were significantly associated with frequent feelings of loneliness (p<0.001). The proportion of the respondents who declared to endure loneliness most of the time, compared to none of the time, was significantly higher among Southern Europeans, relative to their Northern counterparts (p<0.001). Recent departure of offspring from the parental nest was a significant predictor of loneliness in both the second (ORs=2.08; 95% CI 1.24-3.48) and the third (ORs=1.75; 95% CI 1.03-2.96) multiple regression models. Conclusion In this sample of older Europeans, several demographic characteristics, specific adverse health conditions, stressful life events and social isolation indicators were associated with feelings of loneliness. Policy initiatives for the alleviation of loneliness in older age should therefore aim at improving psychosocial and health-related difficulties faced by this population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Loneliness among older European adults: results from the survey of health, aging and retirement in Europe

Vozikaki

Papadaki

Linardakis

et al. 2018

J Public Health (Berl.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sullivan et al (2016) have discussed many of the limitation of this approach to studying loneliness including the presumption of shared understanding and the dynamic nature of the experience combined with the complexity and difficulty people may have in describing the experience of loneliness [38]. There is also an increasing acceptance that loneliness is not a static experience but one which may fluctuate during a day, a week or a year [39] and that the population characterised as 'lonely' is not homogeneous but includes those for whom loneliness is an enduring part of their life whilst for others loneliness may increase or decrease as they age.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lonely places or lonely people? Investigating the relationship between loneliness and place of residence

Chapot

Pikhartova

2020

BMC Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Loneliness in later life is largely presented as a problem of the individual focusing upon antecedents such as demographic or health factors. Research examining the role of the broader living environments is much rarer. We examined the relationship between loneliness and three dimensions of the lived environment: geographical region, deprivation, and area classification (urban or rural). Methods: Our sample consisted of 4663 core members (44% males) aged 50+ (wave 7 mean age 72.8, S.D. = 7.1) present both in waves 3 (2006) and 7 (2014) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Loneliness was measured using two approaches, individual and area-based, and both waves included these questions. Individualbased (self-reported) loneliness was assessed using the three item University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) scale (ranging from 3 = not lonely to 9 = lonely) with a score of 6+ defining loneliness. We also used a novel question which asked participants to evaluate how often they felt lonely in their area of residence (area-based; ranging from 1 = often to 7 = never, using cut off 4+ to define loneliness). The lived environment was classified in three different ways: the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), Government Office Regions (GOR), and area classification (urban or rural). Covariates with established relationship with loneliness including demographic factors, social engagement and health, were included in the analyses. Results: In wave 7, the prevalence of individual-based loneliness was 18% and area-based was 25%. There was limited congruence between measures: 68% participants reported no individual-or area-based loneliness and 9% reported loneliness for both measures. After adjusting for individual co-variates only one significant relationship was observed between loneliness and area-based characteristics. A significant association was observed between areabased loneliness and deprivation score, with higher levels of loneliness in more deprived areas (OR = 1.4 for highest quintile of deprivation). Conclusions: Our results indicate that loneliness in older adults is higher in the most deprived areas independent of individual-level factors. In order to develop appropriate interventions further research is required to investigate how area-level factors combine with individual-level loneliness vulnerability measures to generate increased levels of loneliness in deprived areas.

show abstract

“…week or a year [44] and that the population characterised as 'lonely' is not homogeneous but includes those for whom loneliness is an enduring part of their life whilst for others loneliness may increase or decrease as they age.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lonely places or lonely people? Investigating the relationship between loneliness and place of residence

Victor¹,

Pikhartova

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Loneliness in later life is largely presented as a problem of the individual focusing upon antecedents such as demographic or health factors. Research examining the role of the broader living environments is much rarer. We examined the relationship between loneliness and three dimensions of the lived environment: geographical region, deprivation, and area classification (urban or rural). Methods: Our sample consisted of 4,663 core members (44% males) aged 50+ (wave 7 mean age 72.8, S.D.= 7.1) present both in waves 3 (2006) and 7 (2014) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Loneliness was measured using two approaches, individual and area-based, and both waves included these questions. Individual-based (self-reported) loneliness was assessed using the three item University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) scale (ranging from 3 =not lonely to 9= lonely with a score of 6+ defining loneliness. We also used a novel question which asked participants to evaluate how often they felt lonely in their area of residence (area-based; ranging from 1=often to 7=never, using cut off 4+ to define loneliness). The lived environment was classified in three different ways: the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), Government Office Regions (GOR), and area classification (urban or rural). Covariates with established relationship with loneliness including demographic factors, social engagement and health, were included in the analyses. Results: In wave 7, the prevalence of individual-based loneliness was 18% and area-based was 25%. There was limited congruence between measures: 68% participants reported no individual- or area-based loneliness and 9% reported loneliness for both measures. After adjusting for individual co-variates only one significant relationship was observed between loneliness and area -based characteristics. A significant association was observed between area-based loneliness and deprivation score, with higher levels of loneliness in more deprived areas (OR=1.4 for highest quintile of deprivation). Conclusions: Our results indicate that loneliness in older adults is higher in the most deprived areas independent of individual-level factors. In order to develop appropriate interventions further research is required to investigate how area-level factors combine with individual-level loneliness vulnerability measures to generate increased levels of loneliness in deprived areas.

show abstract

Dancing with Loneliness in Later Life: A Pilot Study Mapping Seasonal Variations

Cited by 18 publications

References 25 publications

Loneliness among older European adults: results from the survey of health, aging and retirement in Europe

Loneliness among older European adults: results from the survey of health, aging and retirement in Europe

Lonely places or lonely people? Investigating the relationship between loneliness and place of residence

Lonely places or lonely people? Investigating the relationship between loneliness and place of residence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About