MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414058167 · doi:10.1159/000547022

Outcomes of Interventions for Reducing Loneliness in Elderly Patients in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4414058167 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Minnes, Liza Grosman‐Rimon, Yiffa Noylinger, Aida Nakhoul, Fadi Abu Shkara, Doron M. Menachemi, Yulia Gendler, Jordan Rimon, Nathan M. Stall, Muhamd Atrash, Erez Kachel

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity Health NetworkYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionIntensive careIntervention (counseling)Intensive care unit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Loneliness among the elderly population has been well established as a risk factor for poor health outcomes, including increased morbidity and mortality. The study objective was to evaluate the feasibility of assessing and implementing patient-tailored interventions to reduce loneliness among elderly patients in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU). METHODS: This randomized control trial conducted at the CICU included 58 patients; 28 patients were in control and 30 in the intervention groups. The University of California Los Angeles Loneliness Scale and the De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale were administered at the time of admission to the CICU and immediately before discharge. The intervention group was given an individualized questionnaire to determine their needs and preferences, which were used to create patient-tailored interventions provided by CICU staff. The control group received standard care. RESULTS: The results of the study revealed that while there was no significant reduction in overall loneliness scores between the intervention and control groups, there was a significant difference in the reduction of loneliness scores for the item "I miss having people around me" (p = 0.02) in the intervention group compared to the control group. Additionally, a near significant difference in loneliness score reductions was observed for the item "I feel left out" (p = 0.05) in the intervention group. These results suggest that patient-tailored interventions focused on addressing patient-specific needs may lead to a reduction in certain aspects of loneliness. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of identifying loneliness in a critical care setting, as well as developing an intervention strategy tailored to the individual patient's needs. These findings highlight the importance of addressing loneliness in the setting of an intensive care unit and provide support for the need to further explore and implement strategies to reduce loneliness in this population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontologySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207