Interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness during COVID-19 physical distancing measures: A rapid systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of the worldwide population is at risk of social isolation and loneliness as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to identify effective interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness that are compatible with COVID-19 shielding and social distancing measures. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this rapid systematic review, we searched six electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and SCOPUS) from inception to April 2020 for systematic reviews appraising interventions for loneliness and/or social isolation. Primary studies from those reviews were eligible if they included: 1) participants in a non-hospital setting; 2) interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness that would be feasible during COVID-19 shielding measures; 3) a relevant control group; and 4) quantitative measures of social isolation, social support or loneliness. At least two authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Downs and Black checklist. Study registration: PROSPERO CRD42020178654. We identified 45 RCTs and 13 non-randomised controlled trials; none were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. The nature, type, and potential effectiveness of interventions varied greatly. Effective interventions for loneliness include psychological therapies such as mindfulness, lessons on friendship, robotic pets, and social facilitation software. Few interventions improved social isolation. Overall, 37 of 58 studies were of "Fair" quality, as measured by the Downs & Black checklist. The main study limitations identified were the inclusion of studies of variable quality; the applicability of our findings to the entire population; and the current poor understanding of the types of loneliness and isolation experienced by different groups affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Many effective interventions involved cognitive or educational components, or facilitated communication between peers. These interventions may require minor modifications to align with COVID-19 shielding/social distancing measures. Future high-quality randomised controlled trials conducted under shielding/social distancing constraints are urgently needed.

A Practical Approach to Differentiate the Frontotemporal Tauopathy Subtypes.

This study proposes a practical approach, using the minimum number of brain regions and stains, to consolidate previously published neuropathological criteria into one operationalized schema to differentiate subtypes of frontotemporal lobar degeneration with tau-immunopositive inclusions (FTLD-tau). This approach uses the superior frontal and precentral cortices and hippocampus stained for phosphorylated-tau, p62 and modified Bielschowsky silver, and the midbrain stained only for modified Bielschowsky silver. Accuracy of interrater reliability was determined by 10 raters in 24 FTLD-tau cases (Pick disease = 4, corticobasal degeneration = 9, progressive supranuclear palsy = 5, globular glial tauopathy = 6) including 4 with a mutation in MAPT collected with consent by Sydney Brain Bank. All brain regions and stains assessed proved informative for accurate pathological subtyping, and many neuropathological features were identified as common across the FTLD-tau subtypes. By identifying subtype-specific neuropathological features in the sections selected, 10 independent observers assigned the cases to a FTLD-tau subtype with almost perfect agreement between raters, emphasizing the requirement for the assessment of subtype-specific features for the accurate subtyping of FTLD-tau. This study consolidates current consensus diagnostic criteria for classifying FTLD-tau subtypes with an efficient, simple and accurate approach that can be implemented in future clinicopathological studies.