Perspectives on the non-replication of associations of “loneliness” with systolic blood pressure and HbAlc

Methodological and mental health considerations a commentary on Das (2018)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Das (2018) presents a critique of the loneliness literature in terms of design (viz., small samples and the existence of only one longitudinal study) and potentially flawed data analyses that do not take into account clustering factors such as where the participants live. With respect to loneliness, Das's analysis of two large longitudinal population studies showed neither evidence of a high prevalence nor associations with the cardiometabolic measures, thereby providing additional questions regarding the role of loneliness in the causal chain of health and well-being. If questions concerning what loneliness is and its causal role in the chain of biological, personological, social, and cultural health and well-being are not clearly elucidated, then misconceptions of the role of loneliness construct can arise. Although Das indicates that differences in the assessment of loneliness may contribute to the failure to replicate associations, other individual differences and methodological factors may confound interpretation of the causal role of loneliness; these points warrant further comment, which is the focus of this commentary.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalSocial Science and Medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Loneliness
Mental Health
well-being
mental health
Blood Pressure
health
longitudinal study
interpretation
Longitudinal Studies
evidence
Health
Individuality
Cluster Analysis
literature
Population

Keywords

  • Depressed mood
  • Health
  • Loneliness
  • Mental health
  • Methods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this

@article{3588430b86324bb086eb36372a72f07e,
title = "Perspectives on the non-replication of associations of “loneliness” with systolic blood pressure and HbAlc: Methodological and mental health considerations a commentary on Das (2018)",
abstract = "Das (2018) presents a critique of the loneliness literature in terms of design (viz., small samples and the existence of only one longitudinal study) and potentially flawed data analyses that do not take into account clustering factors such as where the participants live. With respect to loneliness, Das's analysis of two large longitudinal population studies showed neither evidence of a high prevalence nor associations with the cardiometabolic measures, thereby providing additional questions regarding the role of loneliness in the causal chain of health and well-being. If questions concerning what loneliness is and its causal role in the chain of biological, personological, social, and cultural health and well-being are not clearly elucidated, then misconceptions of the role of loneliness construct can arise. Although Das indicates that differences in the assessment of loneliness may contribute to the failure to replicate associations, other individual differences and methodological factors may confound interpretation of the causal role of loneliness; these points warrant further comment, which is the focus of this commentary.",
keywords = "Depressed mood, Health, Loneliness, Mental health, Methods",
author = "Jorgensen, {Randall Steven}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.12.039",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Social Science and Medicine",
issn = "0277-9536",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perspectives on the non-replication of associations of “loneliness” with systolic blood pressure and HbAlc

T2 - Methodological and mental health considerations a commentary on Das (2018)

AU - Jorgensen, Randall Steven

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Das (2018) presents a critique of the loneliness literature in terms of design (viz., small samples and the existence of only one longitudinal study) and potentially flawed data analyses that do not take into account clustering factors such as where the participants live. With respect to loneliness, Das's analysis of two large longitudinal population studies showed neither evidence of a high prevalence nor associations with the cardiometabolic measures, thereby providing additional questions regarding the role of loneliness in the causal chain of health and well-being. If questions concerning what loneliness is and its causal role in the chain of biological, personological, social, and cultural health and well-being are not clearly elucidated, then misconceptions of the role of loneliness construct can arise. Although Das indicates that differences in the assessment of loneliness may contribute to the failure to replicate associations, other individual differences and methodological factors may confound interpretation of the causal role of loneliness; these points warrant further comment, which is the focus of this commentary.

AB - Das (2018) presents a critique of the loneliness literature in terms of design (viz., small samples and the existence of only one longitudinal study) and potentially flawed data analyses that do not take into account clustering factors such as where the participants live. With respect to loneliness, Das's analysis of two large longitudinal population studies showed neither evidence of a high prevalence nor associations with the cardiometabolic measures, thereby providing additional questions regarding the role of loneliness in the causal chain of health and well-being. If questions concerning what loneliness is and its causal role in the chain of biological, personological, social, and cultural health and well-being are not clearly elucidated, then misconceptions of the role of loneliness construct can arise. Although Das indicates that differences in the assessment of loneliness may contribute to the failure to replicate associations, other individual differences and methodological factors may confound interpretation of the causal role of loneliness; these points warrant further comment, which is the focus of this commentary.

KW - Depressed mood

KW - Health

KW - Loneliness

KW - Mental health

KW - Methods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059605511&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85059605511&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.12.039

DO - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.12.039

M3 - Article

JO - Social Science and Medicine

JF - Social Science and Medicine

SN - 0277-9536

ER -