Addressing loneliness and social isolation in 52 countries: a scoping review of National policies.

BACKGROUND: Even prior to the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was ample evidence that loneliness and social isolation negatively impacted physical and mental health, employability, and are a financial burden on the state. In response, there has been significant policy-level attention on tackling loneliness. The objective of this scoping review was to conduct a loneliness policy landscape analysis across 52 countries of the UN European country groups. Our policy analysis sought to highlight commonalities and differences between the different national approaches to manage loneliness, with the goal to provide actionable recommendations for the consideration of policymakers wishing to develop, expand or review existing loneliness policies. METHODS: We searched governmental websites using the Google search engine for publicly available documents related to loneliness and social isolation. Seventy-eight documents were identified in total, from which 23 documents were retained. Exclusion of documents was based on predetermined criteria. A structured content analysis approach was used to capture key information from the policy documents. Contextual data were captured in a configuration matrix to highlight common and unique themes. RESULTS: We could show that most policies describe loneliness as a phenomenon that was addressed to varying degrees in different domains such as social, health, geographical, economic and political. Limited evidence was found regarding funding for suggested interventions. We synthesised actionable recommendations for the consideration of policy makers focusing on the use of language, prioritisation of interventions, revisiting previous campaigns, sharing best practice across borders, setting out a vision, evaluating interventions, and the need for the rapid and sustainable scalability of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides the first overview of the national loneliness policy landscape, highlighting the increasing prioritisation of loneliness and social isolation as a major public health and societal issue. Our findings suggest that policymakers can sustain this momentum and strengthen their strategies by incorporating rigorous, evidence-based intervention evaluations and fostering international collaborations for knowledge sharing. We believe that policymakers can more effectively address loneliness by directing funds to develop and implement interventions that impact the individual, the community and society.

Gender and sexual identity-based inequalities in adolescent wellbeing: findings from the #BeeWell Study.

BACKGROUND: Gender and sexual minority adolescents experience greater symptoms of psychological distress than their peers, but little is known about broader aspects of their wellbeing. This study examines wellbeing inequalities relating to gender and sexual identity among adolescents from Greater Manchester in the United Kingdom. METHOD: 37,978 adolescents (aged 12-15, attending 165 secondary schools) completed surveys of life satisfaction, positive and negative affect (hedonic framework); autonomy, self-esteem, optimism, and positive relationships (eudaimonic framework); and, symptoms of distress and mental wellbeing (complete state framework). Structural correlated factors models were used to assess gender and sexual identity wellbeing inequalities. RESULTS: The magnitude of wellbeing inequalities pertaining to gender and sexual identity were routinely substantially greater than those concerning other characteristics (e.g., socio-economic disadvantage). Gender identity wellbeing inequalities followed a consistent pattern, with the largest disparities evident between gender diverse adolescents and boys. Sexual identity wellbeing inequalities also followed a consistent pattern, with the largest disparities evident between sexual minority youth (both gay/lesbian and bi/pansexual) and their heterosexual peers. Finally, variation was evident across wellbeing domains. For example, observed gender identity (boys vs. girls) and sexual identity (heterosexual vs. sexual minority) disparities were substantially greater for symptoms of distress than for mental wellbeing in the complete state model. CONCLUSIONS: LGBTQ + adolescents experience lower wellbeing than their peers, and this is evident across a range of wellbeing domains. Accordingly, there is an urgent need for the prioritisation of improved prevention and intervention efforts that can better meet the needs of gender diverse and sexual minority youth, and future research should be conducted to improve understanding of the mechanisms underpinning the wellbeing inequalities observed.