Mansfield Louise, Victor Christina, Meads Catherine, Daykin Norma, Tomlinson Alan, Lane Jack, Gray Karen, Golding Alex
Centre for Health and Wellbeing across the Lifecourse, College of Health, Medicine & Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, UK.
Faculty of Health, Education, Medicine and Social Care, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Nov 2;18(21):11522. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182111522.
The paper reports an evidence synthesis of how loneliness is conceptualised in qualitative studies in adults. Using PRISMA guidelines, our review evaluated exposure to or experiences of loneliness by adults (aged 16+) in any setting as outcomes, processes, or both. Our initial review included any qualitative or mixed-methods study, published or unpublished, in English, from 1945 to 2018, if it employed an identified theory or concept for understanding loneliness. The review was updated to include publications up to November 2020. We used a PEEST (Participants, Exposure, Evaluation, Study Design, Theory) inclusion criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment (CASP) were completed and cross-checked by a second reviewer. The Evidence of Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) was used to evaluate confidence in the findings. We undertook a thematic synthesis using inductive methods for peer-reviewed papers. The evidence identified three types of distinct but overlapping conceptualisations of loneliness: social, emotional, and existential. We have high confidence in the evidence conceptualising social loneliness and moderate confidence in the evidence on emotional and existential loneliness. Our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of these diverse conceptualisations to inform more effective decision-making and intervention development to address the negative wellbeing impacts of loneliness.
该论文报告了一项关于成年人定性研究中孤独感概念化方式的证据综合分析。我们的综述采用PRISMA指南，将16岁及以上成年人在任何环境中所经历的孤独感暴露或经历作为结果、过程或两者进行评估。我们最初的综述涵盖了1945年至2018年期间以英文发表或未发表的任何定性或混合方法研究，前提是该研究采用了已确定的理论或概念来理解孤独感。综述更新后纳入了截至2020年11月的出版物。我们使用了PEEST（参与者、暴露、评估、研究设计、理论）纳入标准。数据提取和质量评估（CASP）由第二位审阅者完成并进行交叉核对。定性研究综述证据（CERQual）用于评估对研究结果的信心。我们对同行评审论文采用归纳法进行了主题综合分析。证据确定了孤独感的三种不同但相互重叠的概念化类型：社交性、情感性和存在性。我们对社交孤独感概念化的证据有高度信心，对情感孤独感和存在孤独感的证据有中等信心。我们的研究结果对这些不同的概念化提供了更细致入微的理解，以便为更有效的决策和干预发展提供信息，以应对孤独感对幸福感的负面影响。
