MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144111934 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044517

Loneliness among older adults in the community during COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey in Canada

2021· article· en· W3144111934 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rachel Savage, Wei Wu, Joyce Li, Andrea Lawson, Susan E. Bronskill, Stephanie Chamberlain, Jim Grieve, Andrea Gruneir, Christina Reppas‐Rindlisbacher, Nathan M. Stall, Paula A. Rochon

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoWomen's College Hospital
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsLonelinessMedicineCross-sectional studyOddsGerontologyOdds ratioDemographyFeelingPublic healthLogistic regressionPsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Physical distancing and stay-at-home measures implemented to slow transmission of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) may intensify feelings of loneliness in older adults, especially those living alone. Our aim was to characterise the extent of loneliness during the first wave in a sample of older adults living in the community and assess characteristics associated with loneliness. DESIGN: Online cross-sectional survey between 6 May and 19 May 2020. SETTING: Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of members of a national retired educators' organisation. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported loneliness, including differences between women and men. RESULTS: 4879 respondents (71.0% women; 67.4% 65-79 years) reported that in the preceding week, 43.1% felt lonely at least some of the time, including 8.3% who felt lonely always or often. Women had increased odds of loneliness compared with men, whether living alone (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.52, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.04) or with others (2.44, 95% CI 2.04 to 2.92). Increasing age group decreased the odds of loneliness (aOR 0.69 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.81) 65-79 years and 0.50 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.65) 80+ years compared with <65 years). Living alone was associated with loneliness, with a greater association in men (aOR 4.26, 95% CI 3.15 to 5.76) than women (aOR 2.65, 95% CI 2.26 to 3.11). Other factors associated with loneliness included: fair or poor health (aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.41), being a caregiver (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.37), receiving care (aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.81), high concern for the pandemic (aOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.84), not experiencing positive effects of pandemic distancing measures (aOR 1.94, 95% CI 1.62 to 2.32) and changes to daily routine (aOR 2.81, 95% CI 1.96 to 4.03). CONCLUSIONS: While many older adults reported feeling lonely during COVID-19, several characteristics-such as being female and living alone-increased the odds of loneliness. These characteristics may help identify priorities for targeting interventions to reduce loneliness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.174
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations133
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207