Loneliness and Suicidal Ideation/Behaviour: A Longitudinal Study in a Large German Population Sample
Résumé fourni par la source
Recent representative studies from Germany report that between 16% and 36% of the population regularly experience loneliness. Available research findings indicate a significant positive association between loneliness and suicidal ideation and/or behaviour. The aim of the present longitudinal study was to investigate whether loneliness at baseline (T0) is prospectively associated with suicidal ideation and/or behaviour at follow-up (T1), independent of gender, social circle, depression, anxiety, stress and prior lifetime suicidal ideation and/or behaviour. Data were obtained via an online survey in a repeated-measures design in a large German population sample (N = 4277; 18-89 years of age), divided into four age groups (18-29, 30-45, 46-65 and 66-89 years). In order to examine the association between loneliness and suicidal ideation and/or behaviour, three-step hierarchical regression analyses were conducted in each age group, respectively. The regression models explained between 25.2% and 39.3% of the variance in T1-suicidal ideation and/or behaviour. Loneliness proved to be significantly associated with T1-suicidal ideation and/or behaviour, beyond affective symptoms, social circle and previous suicidal ideation and/or behaviour. The results underscore the importance of loneliness as a relevant component of suicidal ideation and/or behaviour in the German population. The findings emphasise the need to address loneliness in suicide risk assessment.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Loneliness and Suicidal Ideation/Behaviour: A Longitudinal Study in a Large German Population Sample
- Date Crossref
- 25/08/2026
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.