The detractors might want to look up the evidence. Treating lonelieness is far more effective at reducing mortality than many medical interventions including treating hypertension:
Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic
Julianne Holt-Lunstad1.*, Timothy B. Smith2., J. Bradley Layton3
1 Department of Psychology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, United States of America, 2 Department of Counseling Psychology, Brigham Young University,
Provo, Utah, United States of America, 3 Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
Background: The quality and quantity of individuals’ social relationships has been linked not only to mental health but also
to both morbidity and mortality.
Objectives: This meta-analytic review was conducted to determine the extent to which social relationships influence risk for
mortality, which aspects of social relationships are most highly predictive, and which factors may moderate the risk.
Data Extraction: Data were extracted on several participant characteristics, including cause of mortality, initial health status,
and pre-existing health conditions, as well as on study characteristics, including length of follow-up and type of assessment
of social relationships.
Results: Across 148 studies (308,849 participants), the random effects weighted average effect size was OR = 1.50 (95% CI
1.42 to 1.59), indicating a 50% increased likelihood of survival for participants with stronger social relationships. This finding
remained consistent across age, sex, initial health status, cause of death, and follow-up period. Significant differences were
found across the type of social measurement evaluated (p,0.001); the association was strongest for complex measures of
social integration (OR = 1.91; 95% CI 1.63 to 2.23) and lowest for binary indicators of residential status (living alone versus
with others) (OR = 1.19; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.44).
Conclusions: The influence of social relationships on risk for mortality is comparable with well-established risk factors for
Please see later in the article for the Editors’ Summary.
Citation: Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Layton JB (2010) Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review. PLoS Med 7(7): e1000316. doi:10.1371/
Academic Editor: Carol Brayne, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
Received December 30, 2009; Accepted June 17, 2010; Published July 27, 2010
Copyright: 2010 Holt-Lunstad et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This research was generously supported by grants from the Department of Gerontology at Brigham Young University awarded to JHL and TBS and
from TP Industrial, Inc awarded to TBS. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CVD, cardiovascular disease; OR, odds ratio
* E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
The problem will be this Enhanced Service will be funded by cuts to GP monies elsewhere
Will the CQC move to looking at outcomes rather than processes?
Until we act as the Junior Doctors have they will just keep on and on bullying us.
Note the partners income has employers superann costs, plus MDO plus sickness and locum insurance taken off, making it more like £65k
When was the consultation with GPs about what we want? This Union needs to remember dealing with the Government isn't like negotiating with a patient.
To anon 4:20. These Drs have had no training in General Practice. The law states they may only be on the National GP Performers List if they are fully trained or are in training in an approved training practice.
An evidence free statement
Given the new Duty of Candour surely every practice is duty bound to send similar letters?
I sure I'm not alone in considering my prescribing and avoiding Pfizer products where reasonable and practical
Anyone would have thought there was an election
Isn't time the GPC recognised that negotiating with a bully doesn't work
Oops I see £0.5m for 212000 pts.
People might be up for this if your level of resources were available nationally.
It isn't and so they aren't.
Ivan, what did your scheme cost?
So Routine urine dipstick for blood should only be undertaken for patients with new-onset urinary symptoms (lower or upper tract), newly discovered proteinuria or CKD, in monitoring of multisystem disease with potential renal involvement (for instance, lupus) or in annual assessment of hypertension or diabetes.
Well guess what that's about 1:5 of the population
The BMA needs to know it isn't a popularity protest.
They need to be far more aggressive in protecting their members interests.
Be more like Bob Crowe and the RMT.
Being all empathetic and seeing the Govts side doesn't make for effective union representation.
Well done RCGP. Where is the BMA statement?
No problem with publishing pay but it must be after all expenses. By the time you take out defence subs (£6k) RCGP BMA GMC ( £2k) employers superann (£14k) employee superann (£12k) sickness and locum insurance (£3k) the average GP partner earnings of ~£100k become a much smaller sum and way below consultant earnings