What is it about?
In this paper, we explored the quality of reporting of studies describing effective psychological interventions to reduce loneliness. Of the 13 studies meeting our review criteria, we found that the quality of reporting of effective psychological interventions for loneliness was inadequate. Psychological interventions have been found to be promising approaches for reducing severe loneliness. To maximize the uptake and use of these interventions, clinicians need to know not just the general type of treatment used, but exactly what was done (e.g., a detailed description of the method used, the duration or intensity of the intervention, and the adaptations made for individual differences in loneliness). We conducted a systematic review of the quality of reporting of psychological interventions for loneliness, using a modified TIDieR (template for intervention description and replication) checklist. Our results showed that whilst there has been some improvement in the quality of reporting in the past 5 years, none of the studies provided complete information for ALL TIDieR items and – on average - just over half were rated as incomplete or missing essential details required to implement them in clinical practice. Reporting of how interventions had been tailored or modified to meet an individual client's needs was particularly poor, making it difficult for clinicians to know how best to adapt treatment to individual differences in loneliness. Other essential treatment information was also often missing, such as the materials and procedures used, and descriptions of any adverse events. Details of baseline levels of loneliness and the measures of loneliness used were much better than other elements.
Featured Image
Photo by Christina @ wocintechchat.com on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Inadequate description of an intervention hampers correct implementation of effective treatments in clinical practice. Poor reporting may also inadvertently reinforce a “one-size-fits-all” approach to loneliness interventions that downplays the diverse individual needs, context and circumstances of people who feel lonely and limits their effectiveness. Inadequate reporting also means that researchers cannot replicate or build on research findings. For example, better reporting of essential elements of an intervention, and the underlying theory of loneliness, could help in the development of a standardized framework of loneliness interventions. Given the prevalence of loneliness and the pressing need for effective solutions, we encourage authors, reviewers and journal editors to improve the quality of intervention reporting in future studies.
Perspectives
The World Health Organization recently released an evidence and gap map of in-person interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness (https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/pjg8t/). It concluded that whilst a large body of evidence exists, it is unevenly distributed, with a major gap in high quality research. The results of our TIDIER analysis build on these findings, by showing that the quality of reporting of psychological interventions for loneliness also needs to improve, so that those interventions that are effective can be used to benefit those who need them most.
Adjunct Professor Johanna C. Badcock
University of Western Australia
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: What (if anything) is missing in reports of psychological interventions for loneliness? A TIDieR analysis., Current Research in Behavioral Sciences, August 2023, Elsevier,
DOI: 10.1016/j.crbeha.2023.100136.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
