Reflections on measures of social isolation among older adults.
Reflections on measures of social isolation among older adults.
复制标题
对老年人社会隔离措施的思考。
DOI：
10.1038/s43587-023-00472-4
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Cudjoe,ThomasKM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pomeroy,MaryLouise;Mehrabi,Fereshteh;Jenkins,Emerald;O'Sullivan,Roger;Lubben,James;Cudjoe,ThomasKM
2020年，美国国家科学、工程和医学院报告了医疗系统解决社会孤立和孤独问题的机会，这些问题是发病率和死亡率的风险因素1。报告发布后不久，COVID-19大流行接踵而至，这将社会隔离推到了研究和公共卫生议程的前列，因为大部分人口都经历了这种现象。研究表明，社交孤立是不利的身体，心理和认知健康结果的关键风险因素1，2。尽管存在这些影响，但研究界在如何衡量社会隔离方面缺乏共识，这阻碍了应对这一挑战的解决方案的进展。社交孤立影响了15-25%的社区居住老年人，但由于缺乏统一的指标，估计值差异很大。文献综述确定了50多项与社会隔离相关的措施。缺乏衡量共识以及使用的工具在内容、严格性和使用方面各不相同，阻碍了在建立关于社会孤立及其后果的知识方面取得进展。正如美国卫生局局长5在2023年的一份建议中强调的那样，标准化测量对于评估和解决社会隔离的健康风险至关重要。测量问题之一是单项指标的问题。代理变量，如“独居”或“未婚”很容易管理，但不能捕捉社会隔离的关键方面，如在群体（例如，网络规模或联系频率）或社区（例如，志愿服务）水平4的社会联系。社会隔离措施应该捕捉客观和定量的关系组成部分。虽然一些研究人员使用了多领域指标，但单项指标仍然存在，可能会混淆估计。此外，许多研究将社交孤立与孤独互换4。社交孤立是缺乏社交接触和关系，而孤独是主观的，其特征是感觉孤立1（图1）。这些相互关联的概念是适度相关的，并与不同的健康结果1，2。还需要将社会孤立与社会联系的其他方面对健康的影响区分开来。完善和有效的社会隔离措施将有助于实现这一目标。衡量社会联系的客观和主观方面的指标有
In 2020, the National Academies of Sci-ence, Engineering, and Medicine reported on opportunities for the healthcare system to address social isolation and loneliness, which are risk factors for morbidity and mortality 1. Shortly after the report was released, the COVID-19 pandemic ensued—which pushed social isolation up the research and public health agendas as broad swathes of the population experienced this phenomenon. Studies demonstrate social isolation as a key risk factor for adverse physical, mental and cognitive health outcomes 1, 2. Despite these implications, the research community lacks consensus on how to measure social isolation, which hinders progress toward solutions to combat this challenge. Social isolation affects 15–25% of community-dwelling older adults, but estimates vary widely owing to the lack of a uniform metric 3. Literature reviews identify more than fifty measures related to social isolation 4. The lack of measurement consensus and use of instruments that vary in their content, rigor and uptake inhibits progress toward building knowledge on social isolation and its consequences. Standardized measurement is crucial to assess and address the health risks of social isolation, as highlighted in a 2023 advisory from the US Surgeon General 5. Among the measurement issues is the problem of single-item metrics. Proxy variables such as ‘living alone’or ‘not married’are easy to administer but do not capture key aspects of social isolation, such as social connection at the group (for example, network size or frequency of contact) or community (for example, volunteering) level 4. Social isolation measures should capture objective and quantitative components of relationships. Although some researchers have used multidomain metrics, single-item indicators persist and may confound estimates. Furthermore, many studies interchange social isolation with loneliness 4. Social isolation is the lack of social contact and relationships, whereas loneliness is subjective and characterized by feeling isolated 1 (Fig. 1). These interrelated concepts are moderately correlated and associated with distinct health outcomes 1, 2. There is also a need to disentangle the effects of social isolation from other aspects of social connection on health 4. Refined and well-validated measures of social isolation would help to achieve this goal. Measures that capture both objective and subjective aspects of social connection are
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.9
作者：
F. Floyd;H. Markman
通讯作者：
H. Markman
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
E. Thomas
通讯作者：
E. Thomas
行为排练和反馈对痛苦和非痛苦夫妇获得解决问题技能的影响。
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
N. Jacobson;E. A. Anderson
通讯作者：
E. A. Anderson
沟通冲突与婚姻。
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1975
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
H. L. Raush
通讯作者：
H. L. Raush
沟通快速评估量表：沟通质量行为指数的制定。
影响因子：
2.2
作者：
H. Joanning;James Brewster;James Koval
通讯作者：
James Koval