What (if anything) is missing in reports of psychological interventions for loneliness? A TIDieR analysis.

Johanna C. Badcock*, Julie Christiansen, Anna C. Badcock, Mathias Lasgaard

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

20 Downloads (Pure)


Current research suggests that individual differences in the experience of loneliness should be reflected in personalized approaches to treatment. Psychological interventions are effective in reducing loneliness and complete reporting of these approaches in treatment studies is recommended to facilitate their implementation in clinical practice. Here, an adapted TIDieR (template for intervention description and replication) checklist was used to assess the quality of reporting of effective psychological interventions for loneliness, identified in systematic reviews, including adaptations to individual needs and circumstances. Thirteen articles were evaluated, 69% were randomised controlled trials. None thoroughly reported all details of the intervention. The results indicate that reporting of psychological interventions for loneliness is inadequate. Poor reporting of how interventions were tailored or modified for particular client's needs was noted (complete in only 23.1% and 7.7% of studies, respectively), making it difficult for clinicians to know how best to adapt treatment to individual differences in loneliness. Other essential treatment information is also often missing, such as the materials and procedures used, limiting translation of evidence into clinical practice and reproducibility in future research. Greater attention is needed to improve intervention reporting, and increased use of the TIDieR checklist may assist.

Original languageEnglish
Article number100136
JournalCurrent Research in Behavioral Sciences
Number of pages6
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2023


  • Individual differences
  • Loneliness
  • Psychological interventions
  • TIDieR checklist

Cite this