This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Demographics of Users, Social & Digital Divide (679) Loneliness and Social Isolation (80) Preventing Social Isolation and Fostering Social Interactions in Old Age (55) Internet Access and Digital Technology Use in an Elderly Population (179) Cross-Sectional Studies in Public Health (208) Mental Health Issues in Elderly Patients and Geriatric Psychiatry (82) E-Health Policy and Health Systems Innovation (207) Policy and Policy Proposals (115)

Published on in Vol 24, No 1 (2022): January

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/20466, first published .
The Contribution of the Internet to Reducing Social Isolation in Individuals Aged 50 Years and Older: Quantitative Study of Data From the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe

The Contribution of the Internet to Reducing Social Isolation in Individuals Aged 50 Years and Older: Quantitative Study of Data From the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe

The Contribution of the Internet to Reducing Social Isolation in Individuals Aged 50 Years and Older: Quantitative Study of Data From the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe

Authors of this article:

Patrícia Silva1 Author Orcid Image ;   Alice Delerue Matos2 Author Orcid Image ;   Roberto Martinez-Pecino3 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by (13) Tweetations (8) Metrics

    Original Paper

    1Communication and Society Research Centre, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

    2Department of Sociology, Institute of Social Sciences, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

    3Departamento de Psicología Social, Facultad de Comunicación, Universidad Sevilla, Seville, Spain

    *all authors contributed equally

    Corresponding Author:

    Patrícia Silva, PhD

    Communication and Society Research Centre

    University of Minho

    Campus Gualtar, Social Sciences Institute

    Braga, 4710-057

    Portugal

    Phone: 351 253604212

    Email: patriciasilva@ics.uminho.pt


    Background: Social isolation has a negative impact on the quality of life of older people; therefore, studies have focused on identifying its sociodemographic, economic, and health determinants. In view of the growing importance of the internet as a means of communication, it is essential to assess whether internet use interferes with social isolation.

    Objective: This study specifically aims to clarify the relationship between internet use and social isolation of individuals aged ≥50 years, for which other surveys present contradictory results.

    Methods: We performed logistic regression analysis with social isolation as the dependent variable, internet use as the interest variable, and several other sociodemographic, economic, and health characteristics of the individuals as control variables. The sample size was 67,173 individuals aged 50 years and older from 17 European countries (Portugal, Greece, Italy, Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Switzerland, Luxemburg, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Estonia, and Croatia) plus Israel, who were interviewed in the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), wave 6.

    Results: The results show that countries differ in the level of social isolation and rate of internet use by individuals aged 50 years and older. They also evidence that in most of the countries analyzed, social isolation of internet users was lower compared to that of nonusers after controlling for a set of sociodemographic, economic, and health characteristics of the individuals that have been previously described in the literature as determinants of social isolation. Indeed, on average, although 31.4% of individuals in the nonuser group experienced high social isolation, only 12.9% of individuals who used the internet experienced this condition.

    Conclusions: Internet users show lower social isolation. This result underlines the importance of promoting e-inclusion in Europe as a way to counter social isolation of individuals aged 50 years and older.

    J Med Internet Res 2022;24(1):e20466

    doi:10.2196/20466

    Keywords

    social isolation; internet; 50+ individuals; e-inclusion; SHARE 


    Social isolation has been defined as the objective situation of individuals with small social networks and reduced frequency of contact who do not take part in social activities [1-4]. According to the literature, social isolation is associated with an increased risk of mortality [2,5-7]. In terms of health, it has been associated with a greater risk of developing chronic diseases [8] and cardiovascular disease [3,7], as well as increased risk of physical inactivity, tobacco consumption, and various other risk behaviors [3,9]. Furthermore, in old age, social isolation is associated with increased feelings of loneliness [3].

    According to the literature, social isolation tends to increase as individuals age [3,10,11]. Indeed, some events that are more frequent at an older age, such as retirement, the development or worsening of health and mobility limitations, or a change in residence of the individuals with whom they socialize [2,12-16], tend to affect older people’s ability to maintain their social networks and may also cause cognitive decline [17] and increase social isolation [2].

    Social isolation is determined by a set of sociodemographic, economic, and health characteristics of individuals [3,10,13,18,19]. In addition to these determinants, the role of the internet in reducing social isolation is increasingly being discussed [20] because, as an important means of communication, this technology can facilitate interpersonal contact at a stage of life when social networks tend to be restructured [12,21-24]. There are often obstacles to the use of the internet by people of advanced age [25-31]. However, internet use by older adults has been associated with feelings of well-being and social support [32-35], as well as with improved quality of life [36]. Nevertheless, the relationship between internet use and social isolation is unclear, and there is open debate in the literature. On the one hand, some studies conclude that internet use is associated with a decrease in social isolation [11,20,37,38]. In this regard, they claim that the internet has been conducive to successful interactions [39-41] and contributes to maintaining social ties [41-44] and increasing the frequency of contact [45], as well as optimizing the effect of social networks on the quality of life of older people [36]. On the other hand, other studies conclude that using this technology does not reduce social isolation [46]. Furthermore, in some specific cases, its use is actually associated with a greater risk of social isolation. In this regard, problematic and addictive uses of the internet may be related to social isolation [47]. Similarly, some studies support the “time displacement” thesis, which states that the longer individuals surf the internet, the less time they interact with family and friends, as the time spent on one activity cannot be spent on another [48].

    The inconsistent results in the literature underscore the need for more research into the relationship between internet use and social isolation [20,49], in which this concept is clearly defined [50] and which draws on large samples [38,51]. This study specifically aims to contribute to this goal by focusing on the relationship between internet use and social isolation after controlling for sociodemographic, economic, and health variables and selecting a target population of individuals aged 50 years or older residing in 17 European countries and Israel.


    Data and Sample

    This study focuses on 67,173 individuals aged 50 years and older who were interviewed in the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) Project (wave 6) in Austria (n=3358), Germany (n=4347), Sweden (n=3881), Spain (n=5560), Italy (n=5211), France (n=3870), Denmark (n=3661), Greece (n=4814), Switzerland (n=2772), Belgium (n=5700), Israel (n=2013), Czech Republic (n=4793), Poland (n=1802), Luxembourg (n=1543), Portugal (n=1662), Slovenia (n=4186), Estonia (n=5557), and Croatia (n=2443). Details of the SHARE study in Europe have been described elsewhere [52]. Briefly, in wave 6 (2015), a survey of a representative sample of the noninstitutionalized population aged 50 years or older was conducted. Interviews were face-to-face and took place in the household. Trained interviewers conducted the interviews using a computer-assisted personal interviewing program.

    The SHARE project, coordinated internationally by the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy (Germany), has been approved by the Ethics Council of the Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science.

    Measures

    Dependent Variable: Social Isolation

    As in other research [3,4,53], social isolation was computed using a 5-item index. Individuals scored 1 point if they did not live with a partner; 1 point if they did not belong to any organizations, clubs, or religious groups; and 1 point for having less than monthly contact with friends, family, or children. Scores on the index ranged from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a greater degree of isolation. Adopting the criteria of previous studies [2,54-56], we dichotomized the social isolation index to distinguish between low (score <2) and high (score ≥2) levels of social isolation.

    Low social isolation was coded as 0, and high social isolation was coded as 1.

    Independent Variable: Internet Use

    This is a dichotomous variable relating to use of the internet at least once in the last 7 days to send and receive emails, to search for information, to shop, or for any other purpose. This variable distinguishes individuals who use the internet (1) from individuals who do not use it (0).

    Covariables: Sociodemographic and Economic Variables

    The following covariables were considered in this research:

    • Age; gender: female (1) and male (0); years of schooling; self-perception of financial stress: “great difficulty” or “some difficulty” in coping with monthly expenses (0), “easy” or “very easy” to cover monthly expenses (1).
    • Geographical distance from social network: scores ranged from ”in the same household” (1) to “more than 500 km away” (8).
    • Loneliness: assessed through a short version of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (R-UCLA) [57]. The scale includes 3 questions: “How much of the time do you feel you lack companionship?” “How much of the time do you feel left out?” and “How much of the time do you feel isolated from others?” The answer options range from 1 (hardly ever) to 3 (often). The 3 items form a scale that ranges from 3 to 9 points, in which high values represent higher levels of loneliness.

    We also considered health variables:

    • Depressive symptoms, evaluated by the EURO-D scale [58]. The EURO-D scale ranges from 0 to 12 points, which refer to the presence or absence of 12 symptoms of depression, such as suicidal thoughts [58]; as in previous studies [59], we distinguished between more symptoms (1) and individuals with lower scores (0). A score of 4 or more symptoms is considered as a cutoff point to identify major depression [60].
    • Limitations in activities of daily living [61,62], which refer to the presence-absence of difficulties performing on one’s own any of 6 daily living activities, such as bathing, dressing, and toileting; we distinguished between individuals who reported 1 or more limitations (1) and individuals who reported no limitations (0).
    • Physical inactivity: Two items were used to assess the level of physical activity. The first item assessed vigorous physical activity (“We would like to know about the type and amount of physical activity you do in your daily life. How often do you engage in vigorous physical activity, such as sports, heavy housework, or a job that involves physical labor?”). The second item assessed moderate physical activity (“How often do you engage in activities that require a low or moderate level of energy such as gardening, cleaning the car, or doing a walk?”). Participants answered both items by using a 4-point rating scale (1, more than once a week; 2, once a week; 3, 1 to 3 times a month; 4, hardly ever or never). Participants who did not perform any of these activities (never engaged in vigorous or moderate physical activity) were classified as “physically inactive” (1), and individuals who performed at least one vigorous or moderate physical activity were classified as “physically active” (0).

    Statistical Analysis

    Given that the SHARE project includes national samples from different countries and the sample design is not uniform among them, calibrated individual weights were used in the descriptive statistical analysis (for further details, see [63,64]). To compare sociodemographic, economic, and health characteristics between individuals who experience high levels of social isolation and individuals with low levels of social isolation, the chi-square test and Student t test were performed. We used the chi-square test to assess the interdependence between two nominal variables (eg, differences between gender according to their degree of social isolation). The sample means were also compared using Student t tests for independent samples (eg, differences in mean age according to their degree of social isolation). Statistical test results with P<.05 were considered to be significant. The results from these tests were complemented with effect size measures (Cohen d/φ). The interpretation of the results was based on Cohen [65].

    To analyze the relationship between internet use and social isolation, logistic regressions were conducted by country using the Enter method (in which all the dependent variables are inserted in the statistical model simultaneously). The logistic regression is a mathematical model that give odds ratios (ORs) that are adjusted for other covariates (including confounders) [66]. Thus, 18 separate analyses were performed (1 for each country). Weights were not used in the logistic regressions. These analyses were performed using SPSS software (version 25; IBM Corp).


    Eastern and Southern Europe are the opposite of Northern and Central Europe in terms of social isolation (Table 1). In fact, the percentage of individuals aged 50 years and older who are socially isolated is higher in Eastern and Southern Europe (with the exception of Portugal) compared to the two other European regions. An analysis by country confirmed that the highest weighted percentage of people who experience a high level of social isolation is found in Poland (n=463; 36.8%), and the lowest is found in Denmark (n=321; 11.8%).

    With regard to internet use, the countries of Northern and Central Europe also stand out in terms of recording the highest percentages of users, with Denmark once again showing the highest rate of use of technology (n=3053; 81.9%). In contrast, the countries of Eastern and Southern Europe have the lowest rates of internet use, with Croatia standing out as a country where fewer individuals use the internet (n=715; 27.2%).

    In all the countries analyzed, high levels of social isolation are clearly more common among individuals who do not use the internet as compared to those using this technology (Figure 1). Indeed, while on average, in the group of internet users, only 12.9% experience high levels of social isolation, in the group of nonusers, 31.4% are in this situation.

    Table 1. Individuals in the high isolation group (n=11,614) and internet users (n=32,399) by country (N unweighted). Source: Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe wave 6, version 7.0.0; weighted data.
    CountryHigh social isolation group, n (%)Internet users, n (%)
    Poland463 (36.8)447 (28.1)
    Estonia1408 (33.0)2490 (47.6)
    Croatia486 (31.2)715 (27.2)
    Italy914 (26.6)1698 (33.6)
    Slovenia726 (24.5)1564 (40.9)
    Greece1010 (23.3)1265 (27.9)
    Spain946 (22.6)1655 (37.5)
    Czech Republic1028 (21.2)2268 (50.9)
    Israel307 (20.0)949 (50.0)
    Germany552 (19.8)2592 (57.6)
    Austria602 (18.8)1606 (52.6)
    France739 (18.8)2178 (59.8)
    Luxembourg184 (18.0)955 (59.6)
    Switzerland395 (17.2)1912 (71.4)
    Portugal231 (16.9)451 (30.8)
    Belgium891 (15.8)3684 (65.1)
    Sweden411 (14.1)2917 (78.6)
    Denmark321 (11.8)3053 (81.9)
    ‎
    Figure 1. Percentages of users and non–internet users in the high isolation group by country.
    View this figure

    In Table 2, we can observe the sociodemographic, economic, and health characteristics of the individuals who participated in this study, according to their degree of social isolation. The group of individuals who experience high levels of social isolation includes a majority of older female adults, who have on average fewer years of schooling in relation to their counterparts experiencing low levels of social isolation. Similarly, a higher percentage of the more socially isolated individuals reported having a negative financial situation.

    With regard to social networks, the more isolated individuals are more geographically distant from members of their network than their less isolated counterparts. Likewise, more socially isolated individuals also experience greater feelings of loneliness.

    Finally, with regard to mental and physical health, individuals experiencing high levels of social isolation also report more depressive symptoms and physical inactivity than their less isolated peers.

    In Table 3, we can observe a negative association between internet use and social isolation, after controlling for a set of sociodemographic, economic, and health characteristics of the individuals, described in the literature as determinants of social isolation. Indeed, in most of the countries analyzed, internet use relates to a decreased likelihood of high levels of social isolation.

    Denmark is the country where internet users are less likely to experience high levels of social isolation compared to nonusers. In this country, internet users are 72.2% less likely (OR 0.278, 95% CI 0.196-0.396) to be in a situation of high social isolation. Similarly, in France, Sweden, Luxembourg, Germany, Czech Republic, Estonia, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Slovenia, and Spain, internet users are less likely to experience high levels of social isolation than nonusers. In Portugal, Poland, Greece, and Croatia, internet users were not less likely to experience high social isolation. Outside the European context, more specifically in Israel, internet users were 42.7% less likely (OR 0.573, 95% CI 0.383 to 0.856) to experience high levels of social isolation.

    Table 2. Descriptive statistics of the variables studied according to degree of social isolation (N=67,173). Source: Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe wave 6, version 7.0.0; weighted data.
    VariableHigh social isolation (n=11,614)Low social isolation (n=55,559)χ2/t (df)P valueEffect size (Cohen d/φ)
    Sociodemographic and economic characteristics

    		Age (years), mean (SD)70.05 (11.95)65.07 (10.26)48.781 (1)<.0010.498 (small)

    		Sex, n (%)1457.933 (1)<.0010.147 (small)


    		Female8359 (67.6)29,243 (50.3)




    		Male3255 (32.4)26,316 (49.7)



    		Schooling (years), mean (SD)9.51 (4.26)11.17 (4.51)–32.922 (1)<.0010.344 (small)

    		Financial situation, n (%)976.178 (1)<.0010.122 (small)


    		Positive5309 (48.1)34,471 (64.5)




    		Negative5799 (51.9)19,669 (35.5)



    		Geographical distance from social network (km), mean (SD)3.89 (1.57)3.06 (1.61)58.917 (1)<.0010.652 (medium)

    		Loneliness, mean (SD)4.66 (1.78)3.78 (1.27)52.414 (1)<.0010.540 (medium)
    Health

    		Exhibits depressive symptoms, n (%)1327.652 (1)<.0010.144 (small)


    		Yes4697 (43.0)12,751 (25.9)




    		No6713 (57.0)39,556 (74.1)



    		Limitations in activities of daily living, n (%)662.02 (1)<.0010.099
    (trivial)


    		≥12253 (18.9)5977 (11.0)




    		None9358 (81.1)49,440 (89.0)



    		Physical activity, n (%)925.115 (1)<.0010.117 (small)


    		Inactive2434 (23.5)5929 (12.2)




    		Active9178 (76.5)49,473 (87.8)


    Table 3. Statistics related to the importance of the internet as a determinant of a high level of isolation in individuals aged ≥50 years. Data source: Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe wave 6, version 7.0.0 (unweighted).
    CountryaBbaORc (95% CI)P value
    Austria–0.6160.540 (0.419-0.697)<.001
    Germany–0.7970.451 (0.352-0.576)<.001
    Sweden–0.8420.431 (0.316-0.588)<.001
    Spain–0.3280.720 (0.558-0.931).01
    Italy–0.5540.574 (0.415-0.795).001
    France–0.9090.403 (0.312-0.520)<.001
    Denmark–1.2790.278 (0.196-0.396)<.001
    Greece–0.0620.940 (0.717-1.232).65
    Switzerland–0.6750.509 (0.376-0.690)<.001
    Belgium–0.8080.448 (0.356-0.557)<.001
    Israel–0.5570.573 (0.383-0.856).007
    Czech Republic–0.7950.452 (0.367-0.557)<.001
    Poland–0.1660.847 (0.521-1.377).50
    Luxembourg–0.8020.448 (0.275-0.732).001
    Portugal0.3511.421 (0.862-2.342).168
    Slovenia–0.5000.606 (0.430-0.856).004
    Estonia–0.7880.455 (0.371-0.557)<.001
    Croatia–0.3000.741 (0.529-1.038).08

    aUnweighted n values: Austria, 2523; Germany, 3853; Sweden, 3205; Spain, 4079; Italy, 3297; France, 2904; Denmark, 3110; Greece, 4128; Switzerland, 2329; Belgium, 3999; Israel, 1242; Czech Republic, 3941; Poland, 1161; Luxembourg, 1394; Portugal, 1284; Slovenia, 2523; Estonia, 4154; Croatia, 2274.

    bB: Standardized Coefficients

    caOR: adjusted odds ratio from the logistic regression with adjustment for age, gender, years of schooling, self-perception of financial stress, limitations to activities of daily life, EURO-D score, physical inactivity, geographical distance from social network, and loneliness.


    Principal Findings

    The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between internet use and social isolation of individuals aged ≥50 years. The results evidence that in most of the European countries analyzed, as well as in Israel, use of the internet by adults aged ≥50 years is related to a decreased likelihood of high levels of social isolation. Thus, this study contributes to the open debate in literature [37,50] for which other surveys present contradictory results. This could be related to the results of other studies [11,20,67] that suggest that the internet may facilitate communication and therefore enable individuals to maintain important contacts [36,39,68]. The internet may therefore contribute to less social isolation, even in less favorable contexts [12], such as when older people live at a greater geographical distance from elements of their social networks following retirement, migration, or a change in residence for other reasons [2,12-15]. However, the impact of ICT cannot be explained solely in terms of the fact that it creates opportunities for communication. The literature reveals that it counters social isolation by enabling people to obtain social support and motivating individuals to participate more in activities that interest them, because it contributes to self-confidence [37] and facilitates access to services [69].

    In this study, it was also possible to verify that in the European context, countries in Eastern and Southern Europe had the highest percentages of individuals experiencing high levels of social isolation. This result is consistent with results in other studies comparing the northern European countries with southern European countries, which indicate the existence of greater social isolation in the southern countries [70]. In line with other research [3,10,11], this study concludes that high levels of social isolation are more common in older female individuals [71]. This finding contradicts the results of other research that identifies men as being more isolated than women [13,18]. The results also reveal that the most isolated individuals also have more financial difficulties, as noted in other research [3,13,18], and they experience higher levels of loneliness, as also noted in other research [19]. In this study, individuals in situations of high social isolation also reported being more geographically distant from their social network. The impact of increased geographical distance on establishing social interactions at an older age was previously underlined by other surveys showing that one of the main reasons for losing elements of adult social networks is a change in residence of these individuals [72]. In terms of health, people experiencing high levels of social isolation also report being frailer, both physically and mentally [3,18].

    However, as previously mentioned, the main contribution of the study is that after controlling for the impact of these variables, internet use is associated with lower risk of social isolation.

    Limitations

    This study has several limitations. The main limitation is that a single item was used to measure overall internet use. Nevertheless, a yes/no response to whether someone regularly uses the internet has frequently been used to assess internet use by older people [25,45,51,67]. In the same vein, this measure was used in the SHARE project. Nonetheless, considering that the impact of the internet in the social sphere depends on the type of activities conducted on the web [73-75], it is important for future studies to consider the impact that different uses of the internet may have on social isolation. Furthermore, future research should consider longitudinal analyses to explore causality.

    Conclusion

    The results of this research contribute to the scientific debate about the relationship between internet use and social isolation, showing that even after controlling for the main determinants of social isolation, the use of the internet is related to lower levels of isolation in several countries.

    These results indicate the importance of developing public policies in Europe aimed at increasing rates of internet use as a way to ensure e-inclusion and prevent social isolation at an older age.

    Conflicts of Interest

    None declared.

    1. de Jong Gierveld J, Havens B. Cross-national Comparisons of Social Isolation and Loneliness: Introduction and Overview. Can. J. Aging 2010 Mar 31;23(2):109-113. [CrossRef]
    2. Steptoe A, Shankar A, Demakakos P, Wardle J. Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women. In: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Apr 09 Presented at: PNAS; 2013; Berkeley p. 5797-5801   URL: http://www.pnas.org/lookup/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=23530191 [CrossRef]
    3. Shankar A, McMunn A, Banks J, Steptoe A. Loneliness, social isolation, and behavioral and biological health indicators in older adults. Health Psychol 2011 Jul;30(4):377-385. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    4. Shankar A, Rafnsson SB, Steptoe A. Longitudinal associations between social connections and subjective wellbeing in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Psychol Health 2015;30(6):686-698. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    5. Heffner KL, Waring ME, Roberts MB, Eaton CB, Gramling R. Social isolation, C-reactive protein, and coronary heart disease mortality among community-dwelling adults. Soc Sci Med 2011 May;72(9):1482-1488 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    6. Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Baker M, Harris T, Stephenson D. Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: a meta-analytic review. Perspect Psychol Sci 2015 Mar;10(2):227-237. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    7. Leigh-Hunt N, Bagguley D, Bash K, Turner V, Turnbull S, Valtorta N, et al. An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness. Public Health 2017 Nov;152:157-171. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    8. Cantarero-Prieto D, Pascual-Sáez M, Blázquez-Fernández C. Social isolation and multiple chronic diseases after age 50: A European macro-regional analysis. PLoS One 2018;13(10):e0205062 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    9. Schrempft S, Jackowska M, Hamer M, Steptoe A. Associations between social isolation, loneliness, and objective physical activity in older men and women. BMC Public Health 2019 Jan 16;19(1):74 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    10. Iliffe S, Kharicha K, Harari D, Swift C, Gillmann G, Stuck AE. Health risk appraisal in older people 6: factors associated with self-reported poor vision and uptake of eye tests in older people. BMC Fam Pract 2013 Sep 03;14:130 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    11. Lelkes O. Happier and less isolated: internet use in old age. J Poverty Soc Justice 2013 Feb 28;21(1):33-46. [CrossRef]
    12. Antonucci T, Ajrouch K, Manalel J. Social Relations and Technology: Continuity, Context, and Change. Innovation in Aging 2017;1(3):9. [CrossRef]
    13. Cudjoe T, Roth D, Szanton S, Wolff J, Boyd C, Thorpe R. The Epidemiology of Social Isolation: National Health and Aging Trends Study. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2020 Jan 01;75(1):107-113 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    14. Cornwell B, Laumann EO. The health benefits of network growth: new evidence from a national survey of older adults. Soc Sci Med 2015 Jan;125:94-106 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    15. Beckenhauer JIL, Armstrong J. Exploring Relationships Between Normative Aging, Technology, and Communication. Marriage Fam Rev 2009 Oct 21;45(6-8):825-844. [CrossRef]
    16. Pavela G. Functional Status and Social Contact Among Older Adults. Res Aging 2015 Nov;37(8):815-836 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    17. DiNapoli EA, Wu B, Scogin F. Social isolation and cognitive function in Appalachian older adults. Res Aging 2014 Mar;36(2):161-179. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    18. Menec VH, Newall NE, Mackenzie CS, Shooshtari S, Nowicki S. Examining individual and geographic factors associated with social isolation and loneliness using Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) data. PLoS One 2019;14(2):e0211143 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    19. Shankar A, McMunn A, Demakakos P, Hamer M, Steptoe A. Social isolation and loneliness: Prospective associations with functional status in older adults. Health Psychol 2017 Feb;36(2):179-187. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    20. Khosravi P, Rezvani A, Wiewiora A. The impact of technology on older adults’ social isolation. Comput Hum Behav 2016 Oct;63:594-603. [CrossRef]
    21. Antonucci TC, Ajrouch KJ, Birditt KS. The convoy model: explaining social relations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Gerontologist 2014 Feb;54(1):82-92. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    22. Carstensen LL. Evidence for a Life-Span Theory of Socioemotional Selectivity. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2016 Jun 22;4(5):151-156. [CrossRef]
    23. Charles ST, Carstensen LL. Social and emotional aging. Annu Rev Psychol 2010;61:383-409 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    24. Khan R, Antonucci T. Convoys over the life course: Attachment, roles,social support. In: Baltes B, Brim O, editors. Life-span development and behavior. New York: Academic Press; 1980.
    25. König R, Seifert A, Doh M. Internet use among older Europeans: an analysis based on SHARE data. Univ Access Inf Soc 2018 Jan 19;17(3):621-633. [CrossRef]
    26. Silva P, Matos AD, Martinez-Pecino R. E-inclusion: Beyond individual socio-demographic characteristics. PLoS One 2017;12(9):e0184545 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    27. Selwyn N, Gorard S, Furlong J, Madden L. Older adults' use of information and communications technology in everyday life. Ageing Soc 2003 Sep 02;23(5):561-582. [CrossRef]
    28. Matthews K, Nazroo J, Marshall A. Digital inclusion in later life: cohort changes in internet use over a ten-year period in England. Ageing Soc 2018 Aug 02;39(9):1914-1932. [CrossRef]
    29. Schlomann A, Seifert A, Zank S, Rietz C. Assistive Technology and Mobile ICT Usage Among Oldest-Old Cohorts: Comparison of the Oldest-Old in Private Homes and in Long-Term Care Facilities. Res Aging 2020;42(5-6):163-173. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    30. Anderberg P, Eivazzadeh S, Berglund JS. A Novel Instrument for Measuring Older People's Attitudes Toward Technology (TechPH): Development and Validation. J Med Internet Res 2019 May 23;21(5):e13951 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    31. Knapova L, Klocek A, Elavsky S. The Role of Psychological Factors in Older Adults' Readiness to Use eHealth Technology: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study. J Med Internet Res 2020 May 28;22(5):e14670 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    32. Heo J, Chun S, Lee S, Lee KH, Kim J. Internet use and well-being in older adults. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2015 May;18(5):268-272. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    33. Seçkin G. Using Hierarchical Multivariate Analysis to Examine Interactions Between Alternative Appraisals of Cancer and Virtual Health Support Among Middle-Aged and Older Internet Users. Res Aging 2012 Oct 29;35(6):688-709. [CrossRef]
    34. Jones RB, Ashurst EJ, Atkey J, Duffy B. Older people going online: its value and before-after evaluation of volunteer support. J Med Internet Res 2015 May 18;17(5):e122 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    35. Silva P, Matos AD, Martinez-Pecino R. Can the internet reduce the loneliness of 50+ living alone? Inf Commun Soc 2020 May 12:1-17. [CrossRef]
    36. Silva P, Delerue Matos A, Martinez-Pecino R. Confidant Network and Quality of Life of Individuals Aged 50+: The Positive Role of Internet Use. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2018 Nov;21(11):694-702. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    37. Chen YR, Schulz PJ. The Effect of Information Communication Technology Interventions on Reducing Social Isolation in the Elderly: A Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res 2016 Jan 28;18(1):e18 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    38. Cotton S, Anderson W, McCullough B. The impact of ICT use on loneliness and contact with others among older adults. Gerontechnology 2012;11(2):1-8. [CrossRef]
    39. Russell C, Campbell A, Hughes I. Ageing, social capital and the Internet: findings from an exploratory study of Australian 'silver surfers'. Australas J Ageing 2008 Jun;27(2):78-82. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    40. Chopik WJ. The Benefits of Social Technology Use Among Older Adults Are Mediated by Reduced Loneliness. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2016 Sep;19(9):551-556 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    41. Zaine I, Frohlich DM, Rodrigues KRDH, Cunha BCR, Orlando AF, Scalco LF, et al. Promoting Social Connection and Deepening Relations Among Older Adults: Design and Qualitative Evaluation of Media Parcels. J Med Internet Res 2019 Oct 03;21(10):e14112 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    42. Sum S, Mathews RM, Pourghasem M, Hughes I. Internet use as a predictor of sense of community in older people. Cyberpsychol Behav 2009 Apr;12(2):235-239. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    43. Cotten SR, Anderson WA, McCullough BM. Impact of internet use on loneliness and contact with others among older adults: cross-sectional analysis. J Med Internet Res 2013 Feb 28;15(2):e39 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    44. Willard S, van Rossum E, Spreeuwenberg M, de Witte L. Perceived Impact of an Online Community Care Platform for Dutch Older Adults on Local Participation, Informal Caregiving, and Feelings of Connectedness: Pretest-Posttest Observational Study. J Med Internet Res 2020 Dec 01;22(12):e20304 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    45. Hogeboom DL, McDermott RJ, Perrin KM, Osman H, Bell-Ellison BA. Internet Use and Social Networking Among Middle Aged and Older Adults. Educ Gerontol 2010 Jan 05;36(2):93-111. [CrossRef]
    46. Loges W, Jung J. Exploring the Digital Divide: Internet Connectedness and Age. Communication Research 2001;28(4):536-562. [CrossRef]
    47. Meshi D, Cotten S, Bender A. Problematic Social Media Use and Perceived Social Isolation in Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study. Gerontology 2020;66(2):160-168. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    48. Nie N, Hillygus S, Erbring L. Internet Use, Interpersonal Relations, and Sociability: A Time Diary Study. In: Wellman B, Haythornthwaite C, editors. The Internet in Everyday Life. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd; 2002:215-243.
    49. Beneito-Montagut R, Cassián-Yde N, Begueria A. What do we know about the relationship between internet-mediated interaction and social isolation and loneliness in later life? QAOA 2018 Mar 12;19(1):14-30. [CrossRef]
    50. Baker S, Warburton J, Waycott J, Batchelor F, Hoang T, Dow B, et al. Combatting social isolation and increasing social participation of older adults through the use of technology: A systematic review of existing evidence. Australas J Ageing 2018 Sep;37(3):184-193. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    51. Cotten SR, Ford G, Ford S, Hale TM. Internet use and depression among retired older adults in the United States: a longitudinal analysis. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2014 Sep;69(5):763-771. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    52. Malter F, Börsch-Supan A. SHARE Wave 6: Panel Innovations and collecting Dried Blood Spots. Munich: Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA); 2017.
    53. Shankar A, Hamer M, McMunn A, Steptoe A. Social isolation and loneliness: relationships with cognitive function during 4 years of follow-up in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Psychosom Med 2013 Feb;75(2):161-170. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    54. Kobayashi LC, Steptoe A. Social Isolation, Loneliness, and Health Behaviors at Older Ages: Longitudinal Cohort Study. Ann Behav Med 2018 May 31;52(7):582-593 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    55. Stockwell S, Stubbs B, Jackson SE, Fisher A, Yang L, Smith L. Internet use, social isolation and loneliness in older adults. Ageing Soc 2020 May 19;41(12):2723-2746. [CrossRef]
    56. Jackson SE, Firth JA, Firth J, Veronese N, Gorely T, Grabovac I, et al. Social isolation and physical activity mediate associations between free bus travel and wellbeing among older adults in England. J Transp Health 2019 Jun;13:274-284. [CrossRef]
    57. Malter F, Börsch-Supan A. Share Wave 4 Innovations & Methodology. Munich: Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA); 2013.
    58. Prince MJ, Reischies F, Beekman AT, Fuhrer R, Jonker C, Kivela SL, et al. Development of the EURO-D scale-a European, Union initiative to compare symptoms of depression in 14 European centres. Br J Psychiatry 1999 Apr;174:330-338. [Medline]
    59. Schwartz E, Litwin H. Are newly added and lost confidants in later life related to subsequent mental health? Int Psychogeriatr 2017 Dec;29(12):2047-2057 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    60. Guerra M, Ferri C, Llibre J, Prina AM, Prince M. Psychometric properties of EURO-D, a geriatric depression scale: a cross-cultural validation study. BMC Psychiatry 2015 Feb 05;15:12 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    61. Litwin H, Stoeckel K, Schwartz E. Social networks and mental health among older Europeans: are there age effects? Eur J Ageing 2015;12(4):299-309 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    62. Mehrbrodt T, Gruber S, Wagner M. Scales and Multi-Item Indicators Internet. 2017.   URL: http://www.share-project.org/fileadmin/pdf_documentation/SHARE_Scales_and_Multi-Item_Indicators.pdf [accessed 2020-01-30]
    63. Klevmarken A, Hesselius P, Swensson B. The SHARE Sampling ProceduresCalibrated Design Weights. In: Börsch-Supan A, Jürges H, editors. The Survey of Health, Aging, and Retirement in Europe – Methodology. Mannheim: Research Institute for the Economics of Aging (MEA); 2005:28-69.
    64. Lynn P, De Luca G, Ganninger M. Sample Design in SHARE Wave Four. In: Malter F, Börsch-supan A, editors. SHARE Wave 4: innovations & Methodology. SHARE Wave 4 Innov Methodol München: MEA. Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy; 2013:74-123.
    65. Cohen J. The t test for means. In: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Routledge; 1988:19-74.
    66. Pourhoseingholi MA, Baghestani AR, Vahedi M. How to control confounding effects by statistical analysis. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench 2012;5(2):79-83 [FREE Full text] [Medline]
    67. Cotten SR, Ford G, Ford S, Hale TM. Internet use and depression among retired older adults in the United States: a longitudinal analysis. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2014 Sep;69(5):763-771. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    68. Martinez-Pecino R, Delerue Matos A, Silva P. Portuguese older people and the Internet: Interaction, uses, motivations, and obstacles. Communications 2013;38:331-346 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef]
    69. Berg T, Winterton R, Petersen M, Warburton J. 'Although we're isolated, we're not really isolated': The value of information and communication technology for older people in rural Australia. Australas J Ageing 2017 Dec;36(4):313-317. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    70. Vozikaki M, Papadaki A, Linardakis M, Philalithis A. Social isolation and well-being among older adults in Europe. Archives of Hellenic Medicine 2018;35:506-519 [FREE Full text]
    71. Locher JL, Ritchie CS, Roth DL, Baker PS, Bodner EV, Allman RM. Social isolation, support, and capital and nutritional risk in an older sample: ethnic and gender differences. Soc Sci Med 2005 Feb;60(4):747-761 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    72. Cornwell B, Schumm LP, Laumann EO, Kim J, Kim Y. Assessment of social network change in a national longitudinal survey. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2014 Nov;69 Suppl 2:S75-S82 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    73. Hampton K, Her E, Rainie L. Social Isolation and New Technology How the internet and mobile phones impact Americans’ social networks.: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2009.   URL: http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~stan/csi2911/Pew.pdf [accessed 2020-01-01]
    74. Zhao S. Do Internet Users Have More Social Ties? A Call for Differentiated Analyses of Internet Use. J Comp Mediated Comm 2006 Apr;11(3):844-862. [CrossRef]
    75. Chen W. Internet Use, Online Communication, and Ties in Americans’ Networks. Soc Sci Comput Rev 2013 Mar 15;31(4):404-423. [CrossRef]

    ‎
    OR: odds ratio
    R-UCLA: Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale
    SHARE: Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe

    Edited by R Kukafka; submitted 20.05.20; peer-reviewed by A Stuart, T Wieringa; comments to author 27.10.20; revised version received 03.12.20; accepted 23.09.21; published 03.01.22

    Copyright

    ©Patrícia Silva, Alice Delerue Matos, Roberto Martinez-Pecino. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 03.01.2022.

    This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.