Cited by 53Health disparities and outcomesMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychiatric care and mental health services

Epidemiology of loneliness in a cohort of UK mental health community crisis service users

Open access
Wang, Jingyi, Lloyd-Evans, Brynmor, Marston, Louise, Ma, Ruimin, Mann, Farhana, Solmi, Francesca, Johnson, Sonia·2020·Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: Loneliness is an important issue for mental health service users. However, it has not been a particularly prominent focus of recent mental health research. This paper aimed to explore the severity of loneliness among people leaving mental health community crisis services, and to identify factors associated with loneliness. METHODS: A total of 399 participants experiencing mental health crises recruited for a research trial from community crisis services were included in this cross-sectional study. They completed the eight-item measure of the University of California at Los Angeles Loneliness Scale and a set of instruments assessing socio-demographic, psychosocial, and psychiatric variables. RESULTS: Severity of loneliness was high among people leaving community crisis services. Longer years since first contact with mental health services (2-10 years, coefficient = 1.83, 95% CI 0.49-3.16; more than 10 years, coefficient = 1.91, 95% CI 0.46-3.36) and more severe affective symptoms (coefficient = 0.32, 95% CI 0.23-0.40) were associated with greater loneliness, whereas bigger social network size (coefficient = - 0.56, 95% CI - 0.76 to - 0.36) and greater social capital (coefficient = - 0.16, 95% CI - 0.31 to - 0.003) were associated with less severe loneliness. CONCLUSIONS: This paper supports a view that people experiencing mental health crises often report relatively severe loneliness, and that loneliness tends to become more severe during the course of illness. A greater awareness of loneliness among mental health professionals may be beneficial. Loneliness is a potential focus of the development of interventions to improve the lives and outcomes of people with significant mental health problems.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00127-019-01734-6

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individuals experiencing pre-COVID mental distress are at greater risk of worsening symptoms, and those not previously unwell are at risk of developing mental ill health.

    “Indeed, Wang et al. (2020) suggest that individuals experiencing pre‐Covid mental distress are at greater risk of worsening symptoms, and those not previously unwell are at risk of developing mental ill health.”

    From Living through lockdown: A qualitative exploration of individuals' experiences in the UK. (2022) · cites this paper as Wang et al., 2020

    The Results and Discussion address loneliness among UK mental health crisis-service users, and the Conclusions say loneliness may become more severe during illness. Searches for pre-COVID distress, pandemic-related symptom worsening, and new mental ill health in previously well people found no passage addressing the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

13 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [4]Jopling K Sserwanja I Loneliness across the life course: a rapid review of the evidence 2016 UK Branch Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation
  2. [27]Bech P Larsen JK Andersen J The BPRS—pshchometric developments Psychopharmacol Bull 1988 24 1 118 121 3387515
  3. [28]Tarell JD Schulz SC Nursing assessment using the BRPS—a structured interview Psychopharmacol Bull 1988 24 1 105 111 3387513
  4. [35]Mulasso A, Roppolo M, Giannotta F, Rabaglietti E (2016) Associations of frailty and psychosocial factors with autonomy in daily activities: a cross-sectional study in Italian community-dwelling older adults. Clin Interv Aging. 10.2147/cia.s95162 PMC4714730 26811675 · DOI
  5. [61]Russell D Peplau LA Cutrona CE The revised Ucla Loneliness Scale—concurrent and discriminant validity evidence J Pers Soc Psychol 1980 39 3 472 480 10.1037/0022-3514.39.3.472 7431205 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, J., Lloyd-Evans, B., Marston, L., Ma, R., Mann, F., Solmi, F., & Johnson, S.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • St Pancras Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Johnson, Sonia
Venue
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
Published
2019-06-20
Volume
55
Issue
7
Pages
811-822
ISSN
  • 0933-7954 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-9285
OpenAlex
W2950719666
Cited by
53
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
8.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute for Health Research (RP-PG-0109-10078)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
loneliness, mental health crisis, social network size, social capital, affective symptoms, mental health service users
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Services, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Loneliness, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Cohort Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review