EA - Shallow investigation: Loneliness by Em

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Shallow investigation: Loneliness, published by Em on February 6, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum.This is a shallow report examining loneliness.In a nutshellImportance: 4-4.5/5 Unfortunately, it is very common to experience loneliness and particularly so later in life, so the importance of loneliness as a cause area seems high. There is evidence that loneliness impacts a lot of health and economic domains. More worryingly, there is evidence of a ‘vicious cycle’ between health and loneliness such that lonely people become sicker and sicker people tend to have fewer opportunities to find social contact. Some evidence suggests more people may become lonelier over time.Tractability: 2/5 Current loneliness interventions seem very costly. There is also mixed evidence about the effectiveness of interventions, with some being effective and some not alleviating loneliness. Further challenges relate to the lack of essential data about the prevalence of loneliness, methodological, sampling, targeting and mechanistic problems in interventions. Gaps in knowledge are more pronounced in LMICs.Neglectedness: 3-3.5/5 Funding, relevant NGOs and charities, as well as public awareness campaigns are present and even seem to be increasing in high-income settings. At the same time, there is more pronounced neglectedness in LMICs.[1] Further, there is still a stigma about discussing loneliness and mental health issues.Key uncertaintiesKey uncertainty 1: How effective and sustainable are anti-loneliness interventions in the long run?The current interventional evidence base is predominantly cross-sectional or short in duration, marked by relatively small and not globally representative samples, so it is hard to make strong causal claims as well as claims with high certainty for generalizability. There are few longitudinal interventions, so little is known about the long-term impacts and potential sustainability of such projects.Key uncertainty 2: Can anti-loneliness interventions be scaled?Some of the promising interventions to tackle loneliness require significant involvement in terms of time and service provision, and so may be difficult to scale. Compounding this difficulty, many of the most socially isolated people live rurally or in poorly connected areas and so reaching them may be challenging.Key uncertainty 3: How much can the cost-effectiveness of loneliness interventions (practically) be improved in the short term?A surprising key target many current anti-loneliness interventions miss is actually recruiting participants who are lonely. I anticipate this is an essential part to understanding the real cost-effectiveness of available interventions. Beyond this, provision of a relevant intervention type for the relevant group as well as provision for a sufficient length of time are also warranted.ImportanceProblem OverviewQuestionAnswerDefinition of the problemLoneliness is commonly defined as a discrepancy between a person’s desired and actual social relationships or opportunities for social contact. This can be a subjective (perceived) or objective discrepancy (social isolation). Loneliness is a risk factor for a variety of general and mental health conditions, mortality, loss of productivity, and poor self-esteem.Burden of the problemHealth burden:£170 - £780 per lonely person per year in the UK or about £340 million - £1.56 billion for the lonely adult population in the UK annually.In the US, lonely adults pay an additional $1643 in annual healthcare coverage, which means the lonely adult population in the country may be paying an excess of $18.4 billion annually.In Australia, loneliness is estimated to cost $2.7 billion a year in excess costs linked to additional GP visits, more physical inactivity and smoking, equivalent to $1,565 per person.Productivi...