Cited by 91Schizophrenia research and treatmentHealth disparities and outcomesPsychiatric care and mental health services

Social contacts and loneliness in people with psychotic and mood disorders

Giacco, Domenico, Palumbo, Claudia, Strappelli, Nadia, Catapano, Francesco, Priebe, Stefan·2016·Comprehensive Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Social relations can be measured through: a) objective indicators, i.e. the number of social contacts in a given time interval or b) subjective indicators, i.e. feelings of loneliness. Comparing subjective and objective indicators in patients with psychotic and mood disorders may help to understand whether diagnosis-specific interventions should be designed for increasing their social relations. In this study we assessed social contacts outside home, work environments and mental health services, which may be increased by these interventions. We also explored feelings of loneliness which could influence readiness of patients to participate in interventions. Methods 100 patients in outpatient mental health care were asked to: a) list their social contacts; b) report their feelings of loneliness on a validated five point Likert scale. Multiple logistic regression models were used to test associations of diagnostic categories with: a) having more than one social contact in the previous week; b) reporting at least moderate feelings of loneliness. Results Patients had on average 1.7 (SD=1.7) social contacts in the previous week (median=1.0); 77 patients reported at least moderate feelings of loneliness. Patients with psychotic disorders (n=30) showed a statistical trend towards having just one or no contacts in the week before the assessment (Odds ratio, OR=2.246, p=.087). Patients with mood disorders were more likely to report at least moderate feelings of loneliness (O…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.comppsych.2015.12.008

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Giacco, D., Palumbo, C., Strappelli, N., Catapano, F., & Priebe, S.
Affiliations
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • East London NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (IT)
Corresponding author
Giacco, Domenico
Venue
Comprehensive Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-04
Volume
66
Pages
59-66
ISSN
0010-440X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2232083361
Cited by
91
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1
FWCI
6.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Comprehensive Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
loneliness, social contact, psychosis, mood disorders, interpersonal relationships, objective and subjective indicators, outpatient psychiatric care, social support interventions
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, London, Loneliness, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotic Disorders, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Behavior, Social Isolation, Social Support, Mood Disorders

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