Association between loneliness and psychological distress: A cross-sectional study among Japanese workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.08.21255118: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Limitations of the study: There are several limitations to this study. First, because it was conducted online using the Internet, the generalizability of the results is uncertain, but we attempted to minimize participant bias by sampling by occupation, region, and prefecture based on the incidence of infection. Second, the accuracy of the reported incidence of loneliness may be questioned because loneliness was evaluated only by the question: “Have you ever felt loneliness?” In studies that evaluated accuracy, the binary evaluation of living alone had the lowest accuracy.26 However, we feel that the question asked in this study is appropriate, as it briefly asks about participants’ subjective experiences. Third, because this is a cross-sectional study, the temporal relationship between loneliness and psychological distress is unknown.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.