Effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention to reduce social isolation and loneliness in community-dwelling elders: A randomized clinical trial.

The intervention combined several activities, so the study cannot show which component contributed to any change. Fewer participants completed the study than planned, especially in the intervention group, and the authors say this probably caused differential bias and insufficient statistical power. The intervention was delivered by trained nursing students and volunteers, not by professional primary care staff, so the effect of professionally delivered care is unknown. The programme was a shortened adaptation of CARELINK made for local feasibility, not the original intervention. Baseline groups differed: the intervention group reported more telecare support and more dissatisfaction with family and friend expectations. Participants and staff could not be blinded, and the authors acknowledge possible Hawthorne bias. The intervention was designed for social isolation, not specifically for loneliness or quality of life.

The supplied text states that the funder was Sociedad Española de Medicina de Familia y Comunitaria; it gives no further author conflict-of-interest declaration.

Do not conclude that the programme reduces social isolation because intervention-group scores improved. The primary between-group comparison was null, and the intervention group also had more baseline telecare support and family and friend dissatisfaction.