OBJECTIVE Loneliness is a global health issue, but current loneliness interventions are not scalable enough to reach many who might benefit from them. Brief online interventions could greatly expand access to evidence-based loneliness interventions. METHOD We conducted a preregistered three-armed trial (N = 908, ages 16-78) to compare three self-guided online interventions: a single-session intervention (SSI) for loneliness, a 3-week, three-session intervention for loneliness, and an active control supportive therapy SSI (https://ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT05687162). RESULTS Loneliness decreased between baseline and Week 8 across all conditions (b = -5.80; d = -0.55; 95% CI [-0.62, -0.47]; p < .01), but did not decrease significantly more in those assigned to either the loneliness SSI (b = -1.27; d = -0.12; 95% CI [-0.30, 0.06]; p = .20) or the 3-week intervention (b = -0.93; d = -0.09; 95% CI [-0.27, 0.09]; p = .34) than those assigned to the control SSI. Participants found all three interventions acceptable but rated both loneliness interventions as more acceptable than the control (p < .01). Far more participants completed the 10-min control SSI (86.6%) and 20-min loneliness SSI (69.4%) than the 60-min 3-week intervention (14.9%). CONCLUSIONS An SSI for loneliness was not significantly less effective than a longer loneliness intervention and had a much higher completion rate. Yet, against our hypotheses, neither loneliness intervention reduced loneliness more than an active control SSI did. Future work should aim to design more effective SSIs for loneliness and identify populations for which SSIs might be most helpful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

一项随机对照试验，比较简短的在线自我指导孤独干预措施。


目标 孤独是一个全球性的健康问题，但目前的孤独干预措施的规模还不够大，无法惠及许多可能从中受益的人。简短的在线干预措施可以极大地扩大获得基于证据的孤独干预措施的机会。方法 我们进行了一项预先注册的三组试验（N = 908，年龄 16-78）来比较三种自我指导的在线干预措施：针对孤独感的单次干预（SSI），针对孤独感的为期 3 周、三个疗程的干预，以及主动控制支持疗法 SSI（https://ClinicalTrials.gov，ID：NCT05687162）。结果 在所有条件下，从基线到第 8 周，孤独感均有所下降（b = -5.80；d = -0.55；95% CI [-0.62，-0.47]；p < .01），但在分配给孤独感 SSI (b = -1.27; d = -0.12; 95% CI [-0.30, 0.06]; p = .20) 或 3 周干预 (b = -0.93; d = -0.09; 95% CI [-0.27, 0.09]；p = .34) 比分配给控制 SSI 的值要高。参与者发现所有三种干预措施都可以接受，但认为两种孤独干预措施都比对照更容易接受 (p < .01)。完成 10 分钟对照 SSI (86.6%) 和 20 分钟孤独 SSI (69.4%) 的参与者远多于 60 分钟 3 周干预 (14.9%) 的参与者。结论 针对孤独感的 SSI 与较长时间的孤独感干预相比，其效果并不明显较差，而且完成率要高得多。然而，与我们的假设相反，孤独干预对于降低孤独感的效果并不比主动对照 SSI 更好。未来的工作应该旨在设计更有效的孤独感 SSI，并确定 SSI 可能最有帮助的人群。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。