Cited by 2,158Health disparities and outcomesCOVID-19 and Mental HealthDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 of the 104 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 160 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness

Open access
Leigh-Hunt, N., Bagguley, D., Bash, K., Turner, V., Turnbull, S., Valtorta, N., Caan, W.·2017·Public Health

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Social isolation and loneliness have been associated with ill health and are common in the developed world. A clear understanding of their implications for morbidity and mortality is needed to gauge the extent of the associated public health challenge and the potential benefit of intervention. STUDY DESIGN A systematic review of systematic reviews (systematic overview) was undertaken to determine the wider consequences of social isolation and loneliness, identify any differences between the two, determine differences from findings of non-systematic reviews and to clarify the direction of causality. METHODS Eight databases were searched from 1950 to 2016 for English language reviews covering social isolation and loneliness but not solely social support. Suitability for inclusion was determined by two or more reviewers, the methodological quality of included systematic reviews assessed using the a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) checklist and the quality of evidence within these reviews using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluations (GRADE) approach. Non-systematic reviews were sought for a comparison of findings but not included in the primary narrative synthesis. RESULTS Forty systematic reviews of mainly observational studies were identified, largely from the developed world. Meta-analyses have identified a significant association between social isolation and loneliness with increased all-cause mortality and social isolation with cardiovascular disease. Narrative systematic reviews suggest associations with poorer mental health outcomes, with less strong evidence for behavioural and other physical health outcomes. No reviews were identified for wider socio-economic or developmental outcomes. CONCLUSIONS This systematic overview highlights that there is consistent evidence linking social isolation and loneliness to worse cardiovascular and mental health outcomes. The role of social isolation and loneliness in other conditions and their socio-economic consequences is less clear. More research is needed on associations with cancer, health behaviours, and the impact across the life course and wider socio-economic consequences. Policy makers and health and local government commissioners should consider social isolation and loneliness as important upstream factors impacting on morbidity and mortality due to their effects on cardiovascular and mental health. Prevention strategies should therefore be developed across the public and voluntary sectors, using an asset-based approach.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This systematic overview of 40 systematic reviews found consistent evidence linking social isolation and loneliness to increased all-cause mortality and worse cardiovascular and mental health outcomes. Evidence for other physical health, behavioural, developmental, and socio-economic outcomes was limited or absent.

Key findings

  • Meta-analyses found significant associations with all-cause mortality: social isolation OR 1.29 (95% CI 1.06–1.56; excluding suicide), loneliness OR 1.26 (95% CI 1.04–1.53), and living alone OR 1.32 (95% CI 1.14–1.53); greater social participation HR 0.87 (95% CI 0.82–0.91) and better social networks HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.86–0.97).
  • High social isolation was associated with increased cardiovascular relative risk of 1.5 (95% CI 1.2–1.9); largest social network size was associated with reduced cancer mortality RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.72–0.89).
  • Strong evidence was found for social isolation and loneliness with all-cause mortality, and social isolation with cardiovascular disease and depression; evidence was less strong for behavioural and other physical health outcomes.
  • No systematic reviews were identified for wider socio-economic or developmental outcomes; more research is needed on cancer, health behaviours, the life course, and wider socio-economic consequences.

Methods

  • Systematic overview of systematic reviews; eight databases were searched from 1950 to March 2016 for English-language reviews covering social isolation and loneliness but not solely social support; non-systematic reviews were sought for comparison but not included in the primary narrative synthesis.
  • Forty systematic reviews were identified, ten involving meta-analysis, largely of observational studies and mainly from the developed world; inclusion was confirmed by two or more reviewers.
  • Methodological quality of included reviews was assessed using AMSTAR, and quality of evidence within reviews using GRADE; findings were synthesised narratively.

Limitations

  • Stated: most research came from developed countries and only English-language publications were considered; no reviews considered health economic considerations; age was not analysed in most reviews, with two meta-analyses showing no age effect versus a stronger effect for individuals aged less than 65 years; ethnicity was infrequently recorded; most reviews were of moderate quality and none were high quality; few reviews contained longitudinal studies so causality cannot be inferred; all tools were self-report measures.
  • Evident from the text: significant clinical heterogeneity existed between both the reviews and the primary studies they contained.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.puhe.2017.07.035

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 160 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 70 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 20
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 48
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 19
61 of 61

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?

Self-check

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

  • Kita review study-type counts total 35, not 36

    Minor

    The four study-type counts in Table 1 add to 35, one fewer than the stated total of 36 studies.

    Reported 36 · recomputed 35

  • Pompili review study-type counts total 11, not 12

    Minor

    Table 1 lists 4 cohort, 5 retrospective, and 2 observational studies, totaling 11 rather than the stated 12.

    Reported 12 · recomputed 11

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 102 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 1,006

Metadata

Authors
Leigh-Hunt, N., Bagguley, D., Bash, K., Turner, V., Turnbull, S., Valtorta, N., & Caan, W.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
Corresponding author
Leigh-Hunt, N.
Venue
Public Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-11
Volume
152
Pages
157-171
ISSN
0033-3506 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2755781951
Cited by
2,158
References
102
Citations by year
2026: 222 · 2025: 254 · 2024: 311 · 2023: 311 · 2022: 349 · 2021: 366 · 2020: 246 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 2
FWCI
16.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (DRF-2013-06-074)
  • Solar Energy Technologies Office
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Keywords
social isolation, loneliness, public health impact, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, mental health, morbidity and mortality, social determinants of health, social support, prevention, asset-based approach
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Cardiovascular Diseases, Humans, Loneliness, Public Health, Review Literature as Topic, Social Isolation, Socioeconomic Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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