Cited by 6,757Health disparities and outcomesDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionAging, Health, and Disability

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 13 of the 38 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Loneliness and Social Isolation as Risk Factors for Mortality: A Meta-Analytic Review

Open access
Holt-Lunstad, Julianne, Smith, Timothy B., Baker, Mark, Harris, Tyler, Stephenson, David·2015·Perspectives on Psychological Science

Abstract

Actual and perceived social isolation are both associated with increased risk for early mortality. In this meta-analytic review, our objective is to establish the overall and relative magnitude of social isolation and loneliness and to examine possible moderators. We conducted a literature search of studies (January 1980 to February 2014) using MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, and Google Scholar. The included studies provided quantitative data on mortality as affected by loneliness, social isolation, or living alone. Across studies in which several possible confounds were statistically controlled for, the weighted average effect sizes were as follows: social isolation odds ratio (OR) = 1.29, loneliness OR = 1.26, and living alone OR = 1.32, corresponding to an average of 29%, 26%, and 32% increased likelihood of mortality, respectively. We found no differences between measures of objective and subjective social isolation. Results remain consistent across gender, length of follow-up, and world region, but initial health status has an influence on the findings. Results also differ across participant age, with social deficits being more predictive of death in samples with an average age younger than 65 years. Overall, the influence of both objective and subjective social isolation on risk for mortality is comparable with well-established risk factors for mortality.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1745691614568352

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

13 of 38 cited sources checked · 4 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 52 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 31
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 17
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
42 of 42
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The mortality risk estimates for lacking social connections and for obesity are comparable enough to be directly compared across meta-analyses.

    “with the risk from social isolation and loneliness (controlling for multiple other factors) being equivalent to the risk associated with grades 2 and 3 obesity.”
1 of 1

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.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Conflicting claims about health-status covariates

    Minor

    The paper first says effect sizes were similar whether health-status covariates were included, then says studies controlling for health status yielded substantially different findings from those that did not.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 57 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Booth R., 2000, Medscape General Medicine, 2, 1
  2. Linehan T., 2014, 2030 vision: The best and worst futures for older people in the UK

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 6,757

Metadata

Authors
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., Baker, M., Harris, T., & Stephenson, D.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychology
  • Brigham Young University (US)
Venue
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Published
2015-03
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
227-237
ISSN
  • 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-6924
OpenAlex
W2165243546
Cited by
6,043
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 811 · 2025: 759 · 2024: 702 · 2023: 668 · 2022: 723 · 2021: 728 · 2020: 717 · 2019: 394 · 2018: 251 · 2017: 163 · 2016: 95 · 2015: 29
FWCI
222.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Brigham Young University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
Keywords
loneliness, social isolation, mortality risk, living alone, objective social isolation, health risk factors, age differences, effect size comparison
MeSH terms
Humans, Loneliness, Mortality, Risk Factors, Social Isolation

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 2026-11-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-07 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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