MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388221767 · doi:10.2196/45197

Understanding Loneliness in Younger People: Review of the Opportunities and Challenges for Loneliness Interventions

2023· article· en· W4388221767 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hurmat Ali Shah, Mowafa Househ

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessPsychological interventionMental healthPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Quality of life (healthcare)GerontologyMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loneliness affects the quality of life of people all around the world. Loneliness is also shown to be directly associated with mental health issues and is often the cause of mental health problems. It is also shown to increase the risk of heart diseases and other physical illnesses. Loneliness is studied both from the social and medical sciences perspectives. There are also interventions on the basis of health informatics, information and communication technologies (ICTs), social media, and other technological solutions. In the literature, loneliness is studied from various angles and perspectives ranging from biological to socioeconomical and through anthropological understandings of technology. From the ICT and technological sides, there are multiple reviews studying the effectiveness of intervention strategies and solutions. However, there is a lack of a comprehensive review on loneliness that engulfs the psychological, social, and technological studies of loneliness. From the perspective of loneliness informatics (ie, the application of health informatics practices and tools), it is important to understand the psychological and biological basis of loneliness. When it comes to technological interventions to fight off loneliness, the majority of interventions focus on older people. While loneliness is highest among older people, theoretical and demographical studies of loneliness give a U-shaped distribution age-wise to loneliness; that is, younger people and older people are the demographics most affected by loneliness. But the strategies and interventions designed for older people cannot be directly applied to younger people. We present the dynamics of loneliness in younger people and also provide an overview of the technological interventions for loneliness in younger people. This paper presents an approach wherein the studies carried out from the perspectives of digital health and informatics are discussed in detail. A comprehensive overview of the understanding of loneliness and the study of the overall field of tools and strategies of loneliness informatics was carried out. The need to study loneliness in younger people is addressed and particular digital solutions and interventions developed for younger people are presented. This paper can be used to overcome the challenges of technological gaps in the studies and strategies developed for loneliness. The findings of this study show that the majority of interventions and reviews are focused on older people, with ICT-based and social media-based interventions showing promise for countering the effects of loneliness. There are new technologies, such as conversational agents and robots, which are tailored to the particular needs of younger people. This literature review suggests that the digital solutions developed to overcome loneliness can benefit people, and younger people in particular, more if they are made interactive in order to retain users.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.638
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.093 · 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.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations33
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207