Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review

Abstract Background Loneliness and social isolation are major determinants of mental wellbeing, especially among older adults. The effectiveness of interventions to address loneliness and social isolation among older adults has been questioned due to the lack of transparency in identifying and recru...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Janet Ige, Lynn Gibbons, Issy Bray, Selena Gray
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2019-08-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-019-0825-6
id doaj-5b29ec6987034a64b42e743a3435e019
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5b29ec6987034a64b42e743a3435e0192020-11-25T03:38:20ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882019-08-0119111110.1186/s12874-019-0825-6Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods reviewJanet Ige0Lynn Gibbons1Issy Bray2Selena Gray3Centre for Public Health and Wellbeing, University of the West of England, BristolSouth Gloucestershire CouncilCentre for Public Health and Wellbeing, University of the West of England, BristolCentre for Public Health and Wellbeing, University of the West of England, BristolAbstract Background Loneliness and social isolation are major determinants of mental wellbeing, especially among older adults. The effectiveness of interventions to address loneliness and social isolation among older adults has been questioned due to the lack of transparency in identifying and recruiting populations at risk. This paper aims to systematically review methods used to identify and recruit older people at risk of loneliness and social isolation into research studies that seek to address loneliness and social isolation. Methods In total, 751 studies were identified from a structured search of eleven electronic databases combined with hand searching of reference bibliography from identified studies for grey literature. Studies conducted between January 1995 and December 2017 were eligible provided they recruited community living individuals aged 50 and above at risk of social isolation or loneliness into an intervention study. Result A total of 22 studies were deemed eligible for inclusion. Findings from these studies showed that the most common strategy for inviting people to participate in intervention studies were public-facing methods including mass media and local newspaper advertisements. The majority of participants identified this way were self-referred, and in many cases self-identified as lonely. In most cases, there was no standardised tool for defining loneliness or social isolation. However, studies that recruited via referral by recognised agencies reported higher rates of eligibility and enrolment. Referrals from primary care were only used in a few studies. Studies that included agency referral either alone or in combination with multiple forms of recruitment showed more promising recruitment rates than those that relied on only public facing methods. Further research is needed to establish the cost-effectiveness of multiple forms of referral. Conclusion Findings from this study demonstrate the need for transparency in writing up the methods used to approach, assess and enrol older adults at risk of becoming socially isolated. None of the intervention studies included in this review justified their recruitment strategies. The ability of researchers to share best practice relies greatly on the transparency of research.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-019-0825-6LonelinessSocial isolationRecruitmentOlder adults
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Janet Ige
Lynn Gibbons
Issy Bray
Selena Gray
spellingShingle Janet Ige
Lynn Gibbons
Issy Bray
Selena Gray
Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Loneliness
Social isolation
Recruitment
Older adults
author_facet Janet Ige
Lynn Gibbons
Issy Bray
Selena Gray
author_sort Janet Ige
title Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review
title_short Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review
title_full Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review
title_fullStr Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review
title_full_unstemmed Methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review
title_sort methods of identifying and recruiting older people at risk of social isolation and loneliness: a mixed methods review
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
issn 1471-2288
publishDate 2019-08-01
description Abstract Background Loneliness and social isolation are major determinants of mental wellbeing, especially among older adults. The effectiveness of interventions to address loneliness and social isolation among older adults has been questioned due to the lack of transparency in identifying and recruiting populations at risk. This paper aims to systematically review methods used to identify and recruit older people at risk of loneliness and social isolation into research studies that seek to address loneliness and social isolation. Methods In total, 751 studies were identified from a structured search of eleven electronic databases combined with hand searching of reference bibliography from identified studies for grey literature. Studies conducted between January 1995 and December 2017 were eligible provided they recruited community living individuals aged 50 and above at risk of social isolation or loneliness into an intervention study. Result A total of 22 studies were deemed eligible for inclusion. Findings from these studies showed that the most common strategy for inviting people to participate in intervention studies were public-facing methods including mass media and local newspaper advertisements. The majority of participants identified this way were self-referred, and in many cases self-identified as lonely. In most cases, there was no standardised tool for defining loneliness or social isolation. However, studies that recruited via referral by recognised agencies reported higher rates of eligibility and enrolment. Referrals from primary care were only used in a few studies. Studies that included agency referral either alone or in combination with multiple forms of recruitment showed more promising recruitment rates than those that relied on only public facing methods. Further research is needed to establish the cost-effectiveness of multiple forms of referral. Conclusion Findings from this study demonstrate the need for transparency in writing up the methods used to approach, assess and enrol older adults at risk of becoming socially isolated. None of the intervention studies included in this review justified their recruitment strategies. The ability of researchers to share best practice relies greatly on the transparency of research.
topic Loneliness
Social isolation
Recruitment
Older adults
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-019-0825-6
work_keys_str_mv AT janetige methodsofidentifyingandrecruitingolderpeopleatriskofsocialisolationandlonelinessamixedmethodsreview
AT lynngibbons methodsofidentifyingandrecruitingolderpeopleatriskofsocialisolationandlonelinessamixedmethodsreview
AT issybray methodsofidentifyingandrecruitingolderpeopleatriskofsocialisolationandlonelinessamixedmethodsreview
AT selenagray methodsofidentifyingandrecruitingolderpeopleatriskofsocialisolationandlonelinessamixedmethodsreview
_version_ 1724542758239076352