CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 286Health disparities and outcomesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentBullying, Victimization, and Aggression

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Review: Alleviating loneliness in young people – a meta‐analysis of interventions

Open access
Eccles, Alice M., Qualter, Pamela·2021·Child and Adolescent Mental Health
DOI 10.1111/camh.12389
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Loneliness is common among youth and is associated with poor physical and mental health, and poor educational outcomes. To date, there have been no meta‐analyses of interventions aimed at reducing loneliness among young people. Methods: We conducted meta‐analyses of single group and randomised control trials (RCTs) of studies published between 1980 and 2019, which measured loneliness as an outcome in youth ages 25 years or younger. Moderators, including sample demographics and intervention characteristics, that might affect intervention success, were examined. Results: A total of 39 studies (14 single group and 25 RCTs) were included, and we found evidence that youth loneliness could be reduced via intervention. Moderator analysis – including intervention characteristics, study quality and sample demographics – was also examined. Conclusions: While interventions were shown to reduce loneliness among youth, the interventions included in the meta‐analyses often targeted youth viewed to be at risk – for example those with health concerns – and rarely did the interventions target youth who reported loneliness. There is also no indication of whether youth experienced chronic or transient loneliness. In future work, interventions should be designed specifically for loneliness, with universal programmes helping youth manage their transient feelings of loneliness, and targeted interventions for those suffering from chronic loneliness. There is also a need to look at socioeconomic and other risk factors outside the individual for targeted interventions. Key Practitioner Message: There have been no meta‐analyses that have evaluated the effect of interventions for reducing loneliness among children and adolescents. We found intervention programmes targeted at youth are successful at reducing loneliness. Future interventions should be designed specially with loneliness in mind, with (a) universal programmes to help youth manage their experiences of transient loneliness, and (b) targeted interventions for youth reporting chronic loneliness. They should also examine the longer‐term outcomes of the interventions. Future interventions should be designed, evaluated and then documented using guidelines on how to write up an intervention evaluation.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/camh.12389

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 83 references

2 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Borenstein M., 2013, Comprehensive meta‐analysis version 3
  2. 10.3102/10769986006002107 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.3102/10769986008002157 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 286

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Eccles, A. M., & Qualter, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Lancashire (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
Corresponding author
Eccles, Alice M.
ORCID
Venue
Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-05-13
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
17-33
ISSN
  • 1475-357X (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-3588
DOI
10.1111/camh.12389
OpenAlex
W3011588871
Cited by
285
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 4
FWCI
4.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Child and Adolescent Mental Health (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • CLOK (University of Central Lancashire) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Keywords
loneliness, youth, loneliness interventions, adolescents, children, chronic loneliness, targeted interventions, intervention effectiveness, mental health, social isolation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Humans, Loneliness, Mental Health

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