The impact of COVID-19 restriction measures on loneliness among older adults in Austria
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background
To halt the spread of COVID-19, Austria implemented a 7-week ‘lockdown’ in March/April 2020. We assess whether the ensuing reduction in social contacts led to increased loneliness among older adults (60+).
Methods
Three analyses were conducted: (i) a comparison between pre-pandemic (SHARE: 2013–17) and pandemic (May 2020) levels of loneliness (UCLA-3 scale), (ii) an assessment of the cross-sectional correlation between being affected by COVID-19 restriction measures and loneliness (May 2020) and (iii) a longitudinal analysis of weekly changes (March–June 2020) in loneliness (Corona panel).
Results
We found (i) increased loneliness in 2020 compared with previous years, (ii) a moderate positive association between the number of restriction measures older adults were affected from and their loneliness and (iii) that loneliness was higher during ‘lockdown’ compared to the subsequent re-opening phase, particularly among those who live alone.
Conclusions
We found evidence that COVID-19 restriction measures in Austria have indeed resulted in increased levels of loneliness among older adults. However, these effects seem to be short-lived, and thus no strong negative consequences for older adults’ mental health are expected. Nonetheless, the effects on loneliness, and subsequent mental health issues, could be both more long-lasting and severe if future restriction measures are enacted repeatedly and/or over longer time periods.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.08.20190397: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There are several noteworthy limitations to our analysis. First, to the best of our knowledge, there is no population-representative, individual-level longitudinal data available that covers loneliness among the same older adults before the pandemic, during the lockdown phase and after the lockdown phase in Austria. In consequence, we had to resort to three more indirect analyses: (1) a comparison of cross-sectional survey data during the …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.08.20190397: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There are several noteworthy limitations to our analysis. First, to the best of our knowledge, there is no population-representative, individual-level longitudinal data available that covers loneliness among the same older adults before the pandemic, during the lockdown phase and after the lockdown phase in Austria. In consequence, we had to resort to three more indirect analyses: (1) a comparison of cross-sectional survey data during the lockdown with pre-pandemic repeated cross-sectional data from SHARE, (2) an assessment of the association between being affected by COVID-19 restriction measures and loneliness, and (3) an analysis of weekly changes in loneliness during and after the lockdown phase in Austria. Although these analyses cannot substitute for consistent, high-quality, individual-level longitudinal survey data, we consider them the best available approximations to assess the likely impact of COVID-19 restriction measures on loneliness among older adults in Austria. Second, in contrast to the cross-sectional data analysis where an established instrument for loneliness was used, in the longitudinal data, loneliness was measured only with two single ordinal items, which were further dichotomized during the analysis. Thus, we could not differentiate between different degrees of loneliness in the longitudinal data analysis. Third, it is unclear whether both the cross-sectional and longitudinal sample are representative for the population of older adults regarding lone...
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.
-
