Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41583776›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Social touch deprivation during the COVID-19 pandemic and reduced well-being.

Antje B M Gerdes, Svenja Mareike Roether, Georg W Alpers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Antje B M GerdesDepartment of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Svenja Mareike RoetherDepartment of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Georg W AlpersDepartment of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Social distancing was mandatory during the COVID-19 pandemic to curtail the spread of infections. This hampered interactions with people who did not share households, including the exchange of social touch. We explored how social distancing influenced people's experience of social touch and its impact on psychological well-being during the pandemic. Methods: In an online survey carried out in Germany ( Results: As expected, during the pandemic, social touch was less frequent in both personal and professional settings. However, individuals in a relationship reported relatively stable levels of social touch in personal contexts, unlike those without a relationship. Overall well-being declined during the pandemic, but this decline was less pronounced among those who experienced more social touch independently of relationship status. Discussion: Social distancing in a Western society substantially reduced social touch, which in turn harmed psychological well-being, supporting the notion that touch is a relevant factor for resiliency. This research highlights that individuals who are not in a relationship are particularly vulnerable to the effects of social distancing.

Indexed as

COVID-19resiliencesocial distancingsocial touchwell-being

Identifiers

PMID41583776
PMCPMC12823879

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.