Effectiveness of Interventions for Reducing Loneliness Among Adult Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
11 affiliations
- 1Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Salamanca, Av. de La Merced, 109, 37005 Salamanca, Spain.
- 2Institute of Biomedical Research of Salamanca (IBSAL), 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
- 3National Centre of Reference for People with Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias, 37008 Salamanca, Spain.
- 4Department of Nursing and Physiotherapy, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
- 5Faculty of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
- 6Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SZ, UK.
- 7Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge CB21 5EF, UK.
- 8Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK.
- 9Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
- 10Department of Labor Law and Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
- 11Faculty of Medicine, Department of Statistics, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
Abstract
Background/objectives
Loneliness in adult cancer survivors is a frequent and disruptive psychosocial sequela with important consequences for overall health. Psychosocial interventions designed to address this issue are crucial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the efficacy of various psychosocial interventions for reducing loneliness in adult cancer survivors.Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL Complete and Psicodoc for studies published up to October 2025. Methodological quality was assessed using PRISMA, RoB 2, and the PEDro Scale. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251174610).Results
Psychosocial interventions showed a significant and moderate effect on reducing loneliness (SMD = 0.46; 95% IC: 0.16 to 0.75). Heterogeneity was high (Q = 30.01; p-value < 0.001; I² = 70%), and exploratory analyses suggested that differences in loneliness measurement instruments may contribute to this heterogeneity. Additional benefits were observed in anxiety, depression, well-being, and quality of life. Meaning-based and cognitive-behavioral approaches were found to be most effective. A large proportion of the studies showed a high risk of bias.Conclusions
Current evidence suggests that psychosocial interventions may reduce loneliness in adult cancer survivors. However, given the high risk of bias and heterogeneity, findings should be interpreted cautiously. Standardized tools and longitudinal designs remain essential.
Related
- Effectiveness of interventions for caregiver burden and quality of life of informal caregivers of stroke survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
- Are Asymmetry-Focused Training Interventions More Effective than General Programs in Reducing Interlimb Asymmetries and Improving Athletic Performance? A Systematic Review
- Effectiveness of LDL Apheresis Techniques for Reducing LDL‐C in Familial Hypercholesterolemia: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
- Effectiveness of dynamic neuromuscular stabilization-based interventions for nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Comparative effectiveness of exercise and self-management interventions delivered through different modes of digital support on pain and patient-reported physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
BibTeX
@article{sanchezgomez2026effectiveness,
title = {{Effectiveness of Interventions for Reducing Loneliness Among Adult Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.}},
author = {Celia Sánchez-Gómez and Alba Sánchez-Gil and Eduardo José Fernández-Rodríguez and Jesus Perez and Emilio Fonseca-Sánchez and Sara Jiménez-García-Tizón and Alberto García-Martín and Javier Martín-Vallejo and Juan Luis Sánchez-González},
journal = {Cancers},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.3390/cancers18193101},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42882796},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Effectiveness of Interventions for Reducing Loneliness Among Adult Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
AU - Celia Sánchez-Gómez
AU - Alba Sánchez-Gil
AU - Eduardo José Fernández-Rodríguez
AU - Jesus Perez
AU - Emilio Fonseca-Sánchez
AU - Sara Jiménez-García-Tizón
AU - Alberto García-Martín
AU - Javier Martín-Vallejo
AU - Juan Luis Sánchez-González
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/24
JO - Cancers
DO - 10.3390/cancers18193101
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42882796
AB - Background/objectives Loneliness in adult cancer survivors is a frequent and disruptive psychosocial sequela with important consequences for overall health. Psychosocial interventions designed to address this issue are crucial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the efficacy of various psychosocial interventions for reducing loneliness in adult cancer survivors.Methods A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL Complete and Psicodoc for studies published up to October 2025. Methodological quality was assessed using PRISMA, RoB 2, and the PEDro Scale. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251174610).Results Psychosocial interventions showed a significant and moderate effect on reducing loneliness (SMD = 0.46; 95% IC: 0.16 to 0.75). Heterogeneity was high (Q = 30.01; p-value < 0.001; I² = 70%), and exploratory analyses suggested that differences in loneliness measurement instruments may contribute to this heterogeneity. Additional benefits were observed in anxiety, depression, well-being, and quality of life. Meaning-based and cognitive-behavioral approaches were found to be most effective. A large proportion of the studies showed a high risk of bias.Conclusions Current evidence suggests that psychosocial interventions may reduce loneliness in adult cancer survivors. However, given the high risk of bias and heterogeneity, findings should be interpreted cautiously. Standardized tools and longitudinal designs remain essential.
SN - 2072-6694
ER -