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
. 2024 Dec 5;24(1):3384.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-20779-0.

Measures of social connectedness in adult populations: a systematic review

Affiliations

Measures of social connectedness in adult populations: a systematic review

Ruth Plackett et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Poor social connectedness has been identified as a risk factor for poor mental health but there is a lack of standardisation in how it is measured. This systematic review aimed to identify suitable measures of social connectedness for use in UK adult general populations.

Methods: Searches were undertaken in two stages to identify: (1) measures of social connectedness from review articles and grey literature and (2) studies reporting on the psychometric properties of the identified measures. Grey literature and five databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO; CINAHL and Web of Science. Studies based on UK adult general populations (16-65 years) or other English language speaking countries with similar cultures (US, Canada, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand) were included. Psychometric evidence was extracted relating to six general domains: conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring and interpretability, and respondent burden and presentation. A narrative synthesis summarised these psychometric properties.

Results: Stage (1) 2,396 studies were retrieved and, 24 possible measures of social connectedness were identified; stage (2) 6,218 studies were identified reporting on psychometrics of identified measures and 22 studies were included. These studies provided psychometric evidence for 10 measures, and we did not find psychometric studies for the other identified measures. Six measures (6/10, 60%) reported assessing loneliness and four (4/10, 40%) reported assessing social support but there was a degree of overlap between the assessments of each concept. There was good evidence of reliability across measures, 90% (9/10) had adequate internal consistency, but evidence of content validity was only available for one scale. Five measures (5/10, 50%) reported on at least half of the psychometric criteria, and these were: UCLA-3 (for loneliness), and MSPSS, F-SozU K-6, SPS-10 and SPS-5 (for social support).

Conclusions: This review identified ten social connectedness measures, and identified UCLA-3, MSPSS, F-SozUK-6, SPS-10, and SPS-5 as having the most robust psychometric properties for the UK adult population. Further testing is required to establish content validity, and to clarify the definition and conceptualisation of social connectedness, to enable standardisation in the approach to measuring social connectedness.

Keywords: Loneliness; Psychometric properties; Public health; Review; Social connectedness; Social support.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram summarising the stage one and two social connectedness measures search process

Similar articles

Cited by

  • Editorial: Pain and relationships.
    Carter B, Caes L, McParland J. Carter B, et al. Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2025 Mar 4;6:1563825. doi: 10.3389/fpain.2025.1563825. eCollection 2025. Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2025. PMID: 40104515 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. van Bel DT, Smolders K, IJsselsteijn WA. Kort Yd: Social connectedness: concept and measurement. In: Intelligent Environments: 2009; 2009.
    1. Haslam C, Cruwys T, Haslam S, Jetten J. Social Connectedness and Health; 2015.
    1. Perlman D, Peplau LA. Toward a social psychology of loneliness. Personal Relationships. 1981;3:31–56.
    1. Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Layton JB. Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review. PLoS Med. 2010;7(7):e1000316. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Park C, Majeed A, Gill H, Tamura J, Ho RC, Mansur RB, Nasri F, Lee Y, Rosenblat JD, Wong E, et al. The effect of loneliness on distinct health outcomes: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2020;294:113514. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources