Cargando…

Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact

The purpose of this study is to compare mean levels of loneliness, and correlates of loneliness, among older adults in the U.S. and England. Comparisons are conducted after attending to comparability of the loneliness measure between countries based on tests for discriminatory capacity and different...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hawkley, Louise C., Steptoe, Andrew, Schumm, L. Philip, Wroblewski, Kristen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Ltd. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7577322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33162196
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113467
_version_ 1783598176857489408
author Hawkley, Louise C.
Steptoe, Andrew
Schumm, L. Philip
Wroblewski, Kristen
author_facet Hawkley, Louise C.
Steptoe, Andrew
Schumm, L. Philip
Wroblewski, Kristen
author_sort Hawkley, Louise C.
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this study is to compare mean levels of loneliness, and correlates of loneliness, among older adults in the U.S. and England. Comparisons are conducted after attending to comparability of the loneliness measure between countries based on tests for discriminatory capacity and differential item functioning of the 3-item UCLA Loneliness Scale. Cross-sectional data from the 2015–16 wave of the National Social Life, Health and Aging Project (NSHAP) and the 2014–2015 wave of the English Longitudinal Study on Ageing (ELSA) were analyzed using graded item response models and multiple indicators and multiple causes (MIMIC) models. Risk factors included demographic variables, health characteristics, and social characteristics that were harmonized across surveys. Because of differences in the racial-ethnic composition of the U.S. and England, analyses were limited to white respondents (N = 2624 in NSHAP; N = 6639 in ELSA). Only respondents born 1925–1965 were included in analyses. Discriminatory capacity was evident in each item being able to distinguish a lonely from a nonlonely individual. Differential item functioning (DIF) was evident in country differences in the likelihood of endorsing the “lack companionship” item at a given level of trait loneliness, and in DIF among marital status, education, and gender subgroups that were comparable across countries. Overall loneliness levels are equivalent in England and the U.S. Risk factor impact did not differ between countries, but differences in risk factor prevalence between countries combined to produce a net result of slightly lower mean levels of loneliness in older adults in England than in the U.S. after risk factor adjustment. The fact that the impact of risk factors were similar across countries suggests that evidence of successful interventions in one country could be leveraged to accelerate development of effective interventions in the other.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7577322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75773222020-10-22 Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact Hawkley, Louise C. Steptoe, Andrew Schumm, L. Philip Wroblewski, Kristen Soc Sci Med Article The purpose of this study is to compare mean levels of loneliness, and correlates of loneliness, among older adults in the U.S. and England. Comparisons are conducted after attending to comparability of the loneliness measure between countries based on tests for discriminatory capacity and differential item functioning of the 3-item UCLA Loneliness Scale. Cross-sectional data from the 2015–16 wave of the National Social Life, Health and Aging Project (NSHAP) and the 2014–2015 wave of the English Longitudinal Study on Ageing (ELSA) were analyzed using graded item response models and multiple indicators and multiple causes (MIMIC) models. Risk factors included demographic variables, health characteristics, and social characteristics that were harmonized across surveys. Because of differences in the racial-ethnic composition of the U.S. and England, analyses were limited to white respondents (N = 2624 in NSHAP; N = 6639 in ELSA). Only respondents born 1925–1965 were included in analyses. Discriminatory capacity was evident in each item being able to distinguish a lonely from a nonlonely individual. Differential item functioning (DIF) was evident in country differences in the likelihood of endorsing the “lack companionship” item at a given level of trait loneliness, and in DIF among marital status, education, and gender subgroups that were comparable across countries. Overall loneliness levels are equivalent in England and the U.S. Risk factor impact did not differ between countries, but differences in risk factor prevalence between countries combined to produce a net result of slightly lower mean levels of loneliness in older adults in England than in the U.S. after risk factor adjustment. The fact that the impact of risk factors were similar across countries suggests that evidence of successful interventions in one country could be leveraged to accelerate development of effective interventions in the other. Elsevier Ltd. 2020-11 2020-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7577322/ /pubmed/33162196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113467 Text en © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Hawkley, Louise C.
Steptoe, Andrew
Schumm, L. Philip
Wroblewski, Kristen
Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact
title Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact
title_full Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact
title_fullStr Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact
title_full_unstemmed Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact
title_short Comparing loneliness in England and the United States, 2014–2016: Differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact
title_sort comparing loneliness in england and the united states, 2014–2016: differential item functioning and risk factor prevalence and impact
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7577322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33162196
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113467
work_keys_str_mv AT hawkleylouisec comparinglonelinessinenglandandtheunitedstates20142016differentialitemfunctioningandriskfactorprevalenceandimpact
AT steptoeandrew comparinglonelinessinenglandandtheunitedstates20142016differentialitemfunctioningandriskfactorprevalenceandimpact
AT schummlphilip comparinglonelinessinenglandandtheunitedstates20142016differentialitemfunctioningandriskfactorprevalenceandimpact
AT wroblewskikristen comparinglonelinessinenglandandtheunitedstates20142016differentialitemfunctioningandriskfactorprevalenceandimpact