Loneliness as a Benchmark Social-connection Signal for Psychological Distress: Cross-national, Longitudinal and Genetically Informed Triangulation Evidence.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Fu Yang
{"title":"Loneliness as a Benchmark Social-connection Signal for Psychological Distress: Cross-national, Longitudinal and Genetically Informed Triangulation Evidence.","authors":"Fu Yang","doi":"10.1177/00207640261487612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Loneliness is associated with psychological distress, but whether broader social measures add information is unclear.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To assess incremental information from broader social measures beyond loneliness.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This study combined cross-sectional data from European Social Survey Round 6 (ESS6; 48,377 respondents, 29 countries), prospective Health and Retirement Study (HRS) intervals, and exploratory Mendelian randomisation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In ESS6, loneliness had the largest survey-weighted standardised coefficient (<i>b</i> = 0.221 per SD, 95% CI [0.195, 0.246]), 4.3 times the next-largest coefficient. Adding non-loneliness social variables to covariates plus loneliness yielded little cross-validation gain (delta AUC = 0.0058, corrected [0.0004, 0.0111]), whereas adding loneliness to covariates improved AUC by 0.0739 (0.0653, 0.0825). In HRS, baseline loneliness predicted next-wave depressive symptoms after adjustment for baseline symptoms and covariates (<i>b</i> = 0.108, [0.096, 0.120]); relationship strain was the clearest adjacent signal. Exploratory MR suggested that the loneliness-depressive-symptom association may not be unidirectional, but pleiotropy, relaxed reverse instruments, sample overlap and mixed marker findings precluded directional causal interpretation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Loneliness may serve as a benchmark indicator for population research, while broader measures primarily contextualise relational strain and social safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":14304,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"207640261487612"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640261487612","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Loneliness is associated with psychological distress, but whether broader social measures add information is unclear.

Aims: To assess incremental information from broader social measures beyond loneliness.

Method: This study combined cross-sectional data from European Social Survey Round 6 (ESS6; 48,377 respondents, 29 countries), prospective Health and Retirement Study (HRS) intervals, and exploratory Mendelian randomisation.

Results: In ESS6, loneliness had the largest survey-weighted standardised coefficient (b = 0.221 per SD, 95% CI [0.195, 0.246]), 4.3 times the next-largest coefficient. Adding non-loneliness social variables to covariates plus loneliness yielded little cross-validation gain (delta AUC = 0.0058, corrected [0.0004, 0.0111]), whereas adding loneliness to covariates improved AUC by 0.0739 (0.0653, 0.0825). In HRS, baseline loneliness predicted next-wave depressive symptoms after adjustment for baseline symptoms and covariates (b = 0.108, [0.096, 0.120]); relationship strain was the clearest adjacent signal. Exploratory MR suggested that the loneliness-depressive-symptom association may not be unidirectional, but pleiotropy, relaxed reverse instruments, sample overlap and mixed marker findings precluded directional causal interpretation.

Conclusions: Loneliness may serve as a benchmark indicator for population research, while broader measures primarily contextualise relational strain and social safety.

孤独作为心理困扰的基准社会联系信号:跨国、纵向和遗传信息三角测量证据。
背景:孤独与心理困扰有关,但更广泛的社会测量是否增加了信息尚不清楚。目的:评估从孤独之外的更广泛的社会测量中获得的增量信息。方法:本研究结合了来自欧洲社会调查第6轮(ESS6; 29个国家的48,377名受访者)、前瞻性健康与退休研究(HRS)间隔和探索性孟德尔随机化的横断面数据。结果:在ESS6中,孤独感具有最大的调查加权标准化系数(b = 0.221 / SD, 95% CI[0.195, 0.246]),是第二大系数的4.3倍。将非孤独的社会变量加入协变量和孤独的交叉验证增益很小(δ AUC = 0.0058,修正[0.0004,0.0111]),而将孤独加入协变量的AUC提高了0.0739(0.0653,0.0825)。在HRS中,基线孤独感在调整基线症状和协变量后预测下一波抑郁症状(b = 0.108, [0.096, 0.120]);关系紧张是最明显的相邻信号。探索性磁共振表明,孤独-抑郁-症状的关联可能不是单向的,但多效性、放松的反向工具、样本重叠和混合的标记结果排除了定向因果解释。结论:孤独可以作为人口研究的基准指标,而更广泛的测量主要是关系压力和社会安全。
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
CiteScore
12.30
自引率
1.30%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, established in 1954, is a leading publication dedicated to the field of social psychiatry. It serves as a platform for the exchange of research findings and discussions on the influence of social, environmental, and cultural factors on mental health and well-being. The journal is particularly relevant to psychiatrists and multidisciplinary professionals globally who are interested in understanding the broader context of psychiatric disorders and their impact on individuals and communities. Social psychiatry, as a discipline, focuses on the origins and outcomes of mental health issues within a social framework, recognizing the interplay between societal structures and individual mental health. The journal draws connections with related fields such as social anthropology, cultural psychiatry, and sociology, and is influenced by the latest developments in these areas. The journal also places a special emphasis on fast-track publication for brief communications, ensuring that timely and significant research can be disseminated quickly. Additionally, it strives to reflect its international readership by publishing state-of-the-art reviews from various regions around the world, showcasing the diverse practices and perspectives within the psychiatric disciplines. This approach not only contributes to the scientific understanding of social psychiatry but also supports the global exchange of knowledge and best practices in mental health care.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书