Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2022 Feb 9:376:e067068.
doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-067068.

The prevalence of loneliness across 113 countries: systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The prevalence of loneliness across 113 countries: systematic review and meta-analysis

Daniel L Surkalim et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: To identify data availability, gaps, and patterns for population level prevalence of loneliness globally, to summarise prevalence estimates within World Health Organization regions when feasible through meta-analysis, and to examine temporal trends of loneliness in countries where data exist.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources: Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, and Scopus for peer reviewed literature, and Google Scholar and Open Grey for grey literature, supplemented by backward reference searching (to 1 September 2021) ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Observational studies based on nationally representative samples (n≥292), validated instruments, and prevalence data for 2000-19. Two researchers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Random effects meta-analysis was conducted in the subset of studies with relatively homogeneous research methods by measurement instrument, age group, and WHO region.

Results: Prevalence data were available for 113 countries or territories, according to official WHO nomenclature for regions, from 57 studies. Data were available for adolescents (12-17 years) in 77 countries or territories, young adults (18-29 years) in 30 countries, middle aged adults (30-59 years) in 32 countries, and older adults (≥60 years) in 40 countries. Data for all age groups except adolescents were lacking outside of Europe. Overall, 212 estimates for 106 countries from 24 studies were included in meta-analyses. The pooled prevalence of loneliness for adolescents ranged from 9.2% (95% confidence interval 6.8% to 12.4%) in South-East Asia to 14.4% (12.2% to 17.1%) in the Eastern Mediterranean region. For adults, meta-analysis was conducted for the European region only, and a consistent geographical pattern was shown for all adult age groups. The lowest prevalence of loneliness was consistently observed in northern European countries (2.9%, 1.8% to 4.5% for young adults; 2.7%, 2.4% to 3.0% for middle aged adults; and 5.2%, 4.2% to 6.5% for older adults) and the highest in eastern European countries (7.5%, 5.9% to 9.4% for young adults; 9.6%, 7.7% to 12.0% for middle aged adults; and 21.3%, 18.7% to 24.2% for older adults).

Conclusion: Problematic levels of loneliness are experienced by a substantial proportion of the population in many countries. The substantial difference in data coverage between high income countries (particularly Europe) and low and middle income countries raised an important equity issue. Evidence on the temporal trends of loneliness is insufficient. The findings of this meta-analysis are limited by data scarcity and methodological heterogeneity. Loneliness should be incorporated into general health surveillance with broader geographical and age coverage, using standardised and validated measurement tools.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019131448.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
International estimates for prevalence of loneliness by age groups
Fig 2
Fig 2
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence using scale based measures (de Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale, six item version, and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale, three item version) in older adults (≥60 years). *Thresholds of five or six were applied. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used. Norway is included as part of western Europe owing to the lack of data from other northern European countries
Fig 3
Fig 3
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence based on single item measures in adolescents (12-17 years) by World Health Organization Africa region. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used
Fig 4
Fig 4
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence based on single item measures in adolescents (12-17 years) by World Health Organization The Americas region. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used
Fig 5
Fig 5
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence based on single item measures in adolescents (12-17 years) by World Health Organization Eastern Mediterrean and South-East Asia regions. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used
Fig 6
Fig 6
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence based on single item measures in adolescents (12-17 years) by World Health Organization Western Pacific region. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used
Fig 7
Fig 7
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence based on single item measures in young adults (18-29 years) in Europe. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used. *Unspecified recall period; past week otherwise. †Includes Israel. ‡Includes Georgia
Fig 8
Fig 8
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence based on single item measures in middle aged adults (30-59 years) in Europe. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used. *Unspecified recall period; past week otherwise
Fig 9
Fig 9
Meta-analysis of loneliness prevalence based on single item measures in older adults (≥60 years) in Europe. Generalised linear mixed effects models with binomial-normal distribution were used. *Includes Israel. †Includes Georgia. ‡Unspecified recall period; past week otherwise

Comment in

References

    1. Peplau LA, Perlman D. Perspective on loneliness. Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory, research and therapy. John Wiley and Sons, 1982: 1-18.
    1. Lim MH, Eres R, Vasan S. Understanding loneliness in the twenty-first century: an update on correlates, risk factors, and potential solutions. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2020;55:793-810. 10.1007/s00127-020-01889-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Masi CM, Chen H-Y, Hawkley LC, Cacioppo JT. A meta-analysis of interventions to reduce loneliness. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2011;15:219-66. 10.1177/1088868310377394. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yanguas J, Pinazo-Henandis S, Tarazona-Santabalbina FJ. The complexity of loneliness. Acta Biomed 2018;89:302-14. 10.23750/abm.v89i2.7404. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baumeister RF, Leary MR. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull 1995;117:497-529. 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources