Skip to main content

Table 3 Theoretical underpinnings: proportion of studies targeting each modifiablea factor and indicator, by type of intervention based on proposed mechanisms of action

From: Interventions to address social connectedness and loneliness for older adults: a scoping review

 

Intervention Type

Personal Contact [17, 44,45,46,47,48,49,50] (8 studies/reports)

Activity Group [51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61] (7 studies, 11 reports)

Animal Contact [62,63,64,65,66,67,68] (6 studies, 7 reports)

Skills Course [69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76] (6 studies, 8 reports)

Varied/Non-Specific [40, 41, 77,78,79,80] (5 studies, 6 reports)

Model of Care [81, 82] (2 studies/reports)

Reminiscence [83, 84] (2 studies/reports)

Support Group [85, 86] (2 studies/reports)

Public Broadcast [87] (1 study/report)

Proportion of studies targeting each factor/indicator

Caring

3/8

3/7

4/6

3/6

 

2/2

 

1/2

1/1

Belonging

1/8

1/7

       

Social Network

8/8

4/7

4/6

4/6

5/5

2/2

1/2

  

Social Support

6/8

1/7

2/6

1/6

2/5

  

2/2

 

Personal development

 

1/7

 

4/6

2/5

 

1/2

1/2

 

Technology use

2/8

  

2/6

    

1/1

Busy/Purposeful

  

1/6

1/6

    

1/1

Mental/Emotional

   

1/6

  

1/2

  

Social participation

 

6/7

  

1/5

    
  1. aThere are additional influencing factors that are non-modifiable or difficult to modify. These include marital status, age, living arrangement, cognitive ability, sex or gender, level of formal education, income, religious affiliation, family composition, ethnicity, and death of a spouse. All modifiable factors were identified in a previous literature review [1], except for keeping busy/purposeful activity and personal development, which were identified in the current review from the synthesis of strategies identified in qualitative studies. Modifiable factors of service use, self-reported health and group memberships were not targeted by any of the studies
Back to article page

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us