Trial reportBMC geriatrics2026
Comparison of the effects of mobile learning and traditional self-care education on loneliness and social isolation in community-dwelling older adults: a three-arm randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAging is a complex and multidimensional process that significantly impacts the quality of life of older adults. A prevalent issue in later life, with extensive health consequences, is the experience of loneliness and social isolation. Evidence suggests an inverse relationship between these feelings and self-care abilities in the elderly population. Therefore, investigating and comparing different educational approaches to optimize self-care learning for older adults is essential.
aimThis study aimed to compare the effects of self-care education delivered via mobile learning versus a traditional learning method on loneliness and social isolation among community-dwelling older adults.
methodsThis three-group, randomized clinical trial with pre-test and post-test assessments was conducted in Tehran, Iran, in 2024. A total of 111 eligible participants were selected and randomly assigned to one of three groups: mobile learning (n = 38), traditional learning (n = 38), or a control group (n = 35). The self-care education intervention was administered to the two intervention groups over one month. The Social Isolation Scale and a loneliness measure were completed at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and at a 12-week follow-up. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (version 16) with descriptive statistics (frequency, mean, standard deviation) and inferential statistics (chi-square test, analysis of variance, and post hoc tests). The significance level was set at p < 0.05 for all analyses.
resultsThe results indicated that while loneliness scores improved over time within the groups, there was no significant difference between the traditional learning and mobile learning methods in reducing loneliness compared to the control group at baseline, immediately post-intervention, or at the 12-week follow-up (p > 0.05). Similarly, although changes in social isolation improved in both intervention groups relative to the control group, these changes were not statistically significant (p > 0.05).
conclusionThe findings of this study revealed that neither the traditional nor the mobile learning method was superior to the other in reducing loneliness and social isolation among the participants. Consequently, the choice of educational approach can be based on cost-effectiveness, considering available resources, and the unique preferences, capabilities, and needs of the older adults.
trial registrationIRCT20221024056283N1. https://irct.behdasht.gov.ir/trial/66595 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.