Meaning-centred intervention for managing loneliness among community-dwelling older adults: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ken Hok Man Ho, Jackie Hoi Man Chan, Daphne Sze Ki Cheung, Wallace Chi Ho Chan, Paul McQuillan, Mei Tim Yu, Malik Gulzar, Cho Lee Wong, Chaojie Liu
{"title":"Meaning-centred intervention for managing loneliness among community-dwelling older adults: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol.","authors":"Ken Hok Man Ho, Jackie Hoi Man Chan, Daphne Sze Ki Cheung, Wallace Chi Ho Chan, Paul McQuillan, Mei Tim Yu, Malik Gulzar, Cho Lee Wong, Chaojie Liu","doi":"10.1186/s13643-025-02843-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Loneliness can pose serious health and psychological concerns among community-dwelling older adults. Meaning-centred interventions, which aim to help individuals find meaning in their lives, appeared to alleviate loneliness among older adults. Yet, systematic evidence on the effectiveness of meaning-centred intervention and the experience among older adults towards this intervention is lacking. This review will systematically synthesise the evidence to examine the effect of meaning-centred intervention on loneliness among community-dwelling older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed-methods systematic review (MMSR) with a convergent segregated approach will be employed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute framework for MMSRs. Relevant studies will be searched from inception to 31 December 2024 from nine databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, ProQuest Social Science, Wangfang, and Google Scholar. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods study designs will be included. Two authors will independently perform data extraction and complete risk of bias and quality assessment using recommended tools. The evidence quality will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) guidelines approach for quantitative and qualitative studies, respectively. The phenomena of interest will be the experience of meaning-centred intervention among older adults living in the community and long-term care facilities. The primary outcome will be loneliness. Other related outcomes include meanings in life, social connections, social participation, social isolation, suicide ideation, anxiety, and depressive symptoms.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The review will contribute to a comprehensive understanding of meaning-centred intervention on loneliness among community-dwelling older adults by integrating the quantitative and qualitative evidence. The findings will provide practitioners, researchers, and policy workers with insights on developing and/or adopting meaning-centred interventions for alleviating the loneliness of older adults in the community and eventually promoting healthy ageing.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD 42024614173.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"102"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12060411/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02843-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Loneliness can pose serious health and psychological concerns among community-dwelling older adults. Meaning-centred interventions, which aim to help individuals find meaning in their lives, appeared to alleviate loneliness among older adults. Yet, systematic evidence on the effectiveness of meaning-centred intervention and the experience among older adults towards this intervention is lacking. This review will systematically synthesise the evidence to examine the effect of meaning-centred intervention on loneliness among community-dwelling older adults.

Methods: A mixed-methods systematic review (MMSR) with a convergent segregated approach will be employed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute framework for MMSRs. Relevant studies will be searched from inception to 31 December 2024 from nine databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, ProQuest Social Science, Wangfang, and Google Scholar. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods study designs will be included. Two authors will independently perform data extraction and complete risk of bias and quality assessment using recommended tools. The evidence quality will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) guidelines approach for quantitative and qualitative studies, respectively. The phenomena of interest will be the experience of meaning-centred intervention among older adults living in the community and long-term care facilities. The primary outcome will be loneliness. Other related outcomes include meanings in life, social connections, social participation, social isolation, suicide ideation, anxiety, and depressive symptoms.

Discussion: The review will contribute to a comprehensive understanding of meaning-centred intervention on loneliness among community-dwelling older adults by integrating the quantitative and qualitative evidence. The findings will provide practitioners, researchers, and policy workers with insights on developing and/or adopting meaning-centred interventions for alleviating the loneliness of older adults in the community and eventually promoting healthy ageing.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD 42024614173.

管理社区居住老年人孤独感的意义中心干预:一项混合方法系统评价方案。
背景:孤独感会对社区居住的老年人造成严重的健康和心理问题。以意义为中心的干预,旨在帮助个人找到生活的意义,似乎可以减轻老年人的孤独感。然而,关于以意义为中心的干预的有效性和老年人对这种干预的经验缺乏系统的证据。本综述将系统地综合证据,以检验意义为中心的干预对社区居住老年人孤独感的影响。方法:根据乔安娜布里格斯研究所的MMSR框架,采用融合隔离方法的混合方法系统评价(MMSR)。相关研究将在MEDLINE (PubMed)、PsycINFO、CINAHL、Scopus、Embase、Cochrane Library、ProQuest Social Science、Wangfang和谷歌Scholar等9个数据库中检索,检索时间从成立到2024年12月31日。将包括定量、定性和混合方法的研究设计。两位作者将使用推荐的工具独立进行数据提取,完成偏倚风险和质量评估。证据质量将分别采用建议分级评估、发展和评价(GRADE)方法和定量和定性研究综述证据置信度(CERQual)指南方法进行评估。感兴趣的现象将是生活在社区和长期护理设施中的老年人的以意义为中心的干预经验。最主要的结果将是孤独。其他相关结果包括生活意义、社会联系、社会参与、社会孤立、自杀意念、焦虑和抑郁症状。讨论:通过整合定量和定性证据,本综述将有助于全面理解以意义为中心的干预措施对社区居住老年人孤独感的影响。研究结果将为从业人员、研究人员和政策工作者提供发展和/或采用以意义为中心的干预措施的见解,以减轻社区老年人的孤独感,并最终促进健康老龄化。系统评价注册:PROSPERO CRD 42024614173。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信