Cited by 4Health disparities and outcomesTechnology Use by Older AdultsAging, Health, and Disability

A proactive phone intervention for older adults to address loneliness identified by a health plan

Open access
Hough, Katrina A., Tha, Soe Han, Perissinotto, Carla M., Burnes, Preston, Kotwal, Ashwin A.·2024·Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Social isolation and loneliness are associated with poor health and higher health care costs among older adults. Our objective was to determine if older adults identified as at risk for loneliness by a Medicare Advantage health plan could benefit from a proactive telephone support program. We conducted a mixed-methods pilot efficacy study of outbound calls from an established community-based telephone program to support older adults identified as at risk for loneliness. One hundred and twenty-one older adults were enrolled and completed surveys at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Outcomes included loneliness (3-item UCLA loneliness scale), depression (PHQ-2 screen), anxiety (GAD-2 screen), and unhealthy physical and mental health days (CDC Healthy Days Measure). Quantitative data were analyzed using multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression, and open-ended responses were analyzed thematically. Over 6 months, participants had reductions in loneliness (46% to 28%, p<0.001), depression (36% to 25%, p = 0.07), anxiety (63% to 43%, p = 0.004), unhealthy mental days (14 to 8, p<0.001), and unhealthy physical days (15 to 11, p<0.001). Participants reported high satisfaction with calls, and many felt the calls improved overall mood or health. Findings can inform trials to address loneliness through telephone support and partnerships between community-based organizations and payors.

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/nyas.15223

Cites

20 of 20 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?

  • Other interventions delivered through phone calls or videoconferencing often focus on peer support or empathy-based approaches without consistently employing structured, evidence-based frameworks.

    “Others emphasize interventions delivered through phone calls or videoconferencing, often focusing on peer support or empathy-based approaches without consistently employing structured, evidence-based frameworks [e.g., (69–71)].”

    From Telephone-based group mental health support for older adults in central Canada: pilot acceptability and effectiveness findings of The CONNECT Program (2025) · cites this paper as [69]

    The Methods (Intervention; page unavailable) describe scheduled support calls, and the Results (page unavailable) identify active listening as a valued part of the Friendship Line. The paper does not describe videoconferencing or establish that these interventions lack structured, evidence-based frameworks; the Discussion (Potential Benefits; page unavailable) instead notes that its counselors receive specialized training. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [3]National Academy of Scienes EaM. Social isolation and loneliness in older adults: Opportunities for the health care system. 2020. 32510896
  2. [20]Humana. Humana’s 2019 Bold Goal Progress Report Details A Focus On Social Determinants of Health and Improved Healthy Days in its Medicare Advantage Population. 2019. April 22, 2019. https://press.humana.com/news/news-details/2019/bold-goal-progress-report-details/default.aspx#gsc.tab=0
  3. [27]Office of the Surgeon G. Publications and Reports of the Surgeon General. Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The US Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community. US Department of Health and Human Services; 2023. 37792968

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hough, K. A., Tha, S. H., Perissinotto, C. M., Burnes, P., & Kotwal, A. A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Institute on Aging (US)
  • San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Kotwal, Ashwin A.
Venue
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-09-24
Volume
1540
Issue
1
Pages
191-199
ISSN
  • 0077-8923 (ISSN-L)
  • 1749-6632
OpenAlex
W4402762960
Cited by
4
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 4
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (K23AG065438)
  • Humana
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
Keywords
loneliness, older adults, telephone-delivered intervention, proactive outreach, Medicare Advantage, social isolation, depression, anxiety, mental health, physical health, community organizations
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Humans, Loneliness, Male, Mental Health, Pilot Projects, Social Isolation, Telephone, United States, Medicare Part C

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