Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Younger US men show sharp loneliness increase, older men stable, systematic review finds

Younger US men show sharp loneliness increase, older men stable, systematic review finds
Photo by Felix Rostig / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Consider that younger US men face rising loneliness, but evidence gaps limit intervention certainty.

This is a systematic review of 30 core studies examining loneliness among men in the United States and its links to depression, cardiovascular disease, cognitive decline, suicide risk, and mortality. The authors found that a widespread epidemic of male loneliness is absent overall, but younger males (ages 18–29) appear to be experiencing a sharp increase in loneliness, while older males (ages 60+) show more stable patterns. Identified risk factors include traditional masculine norms, relationship loss, unemployment, disabilities, and veteran status. The review associates male loneliness with serious health problems, including depression, cardiovascular disease, cognitive decline, risk of suicide, and increased mortality. Key limitations noted by the authors include a notable imbalance in the evidence base, with younger men underrepresented relative to older populations, and community-based programs for males that show high participation but are almost entirely under-evaluated. The authors conclude that existing intervention strategies do not sufficiently consider how socialized gender processes influence men’s social withdrawal or disengagement, and that a gender-informed synthesis of patterns, mechanisms, and intervention gaps is needed to provide clarity.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedJun 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
Male loneliness has become one of the most significant public health concerns in recent years, also referred to as an “epidemic.” Research demonstrates that men are at greater risk than women for severe health impacts resulting from loneliness; therefore, a gender-informed synthesis of patterns, mechanisms, and intervention gaps is needed to provide clarity. This systematic review evaluates the current literature on loneliness among men in the United States. Specifically, this evaluation examines prevalence and temporal trends, gendered and life-course risk factors, health consequences, and the effectiveness of extant interventions addressing loneliness. Following PRISMA recommendations, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar for peer-reviewed empirical studies and systematic reviews that included male-specific data. We identified 485 potential references through initial screening, then screened titles and abstracts, reviewed 262 full texts, and ultimately identified 30 core studies that met the inclusion criteria. To assess the quality of each article, we used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and AMSTAR-2. Evidence indicates that a widespread epidemic of male loneliness is absent, although specific groups are at higher risk. Younger males (ages 18–29) appear to be experiencing a sharp increase in loneliness, while older males (ages 60+) show more stable patterns. However, this trend is accompanied by a notable imbalance in the evidence base, with younger men underrepresented relative to older populations. Traditional masculine norms, relationship loss, unemployment, disabilities, and veteran status have all been identified as risk factors for male loneliness. Our research demonstrated that male loneliness is associated with serious health problems, including depression, cardiovascular disease, cognitive decline, risk of suicide, and increased mortality. While community-based programs targeted toward males show high participation, they are almost entirely under-evaluated. Male loneliness is a patterned, life-course-related experience and should therefore be viewed as an ongoing process rather than a single “epidemic” event. Existing intervention strategies do not sufficiently consider how socialized gender processes influence men’s social withdrawal or disengagement. Future research may include conducting male-only randomized controlled clinical trials and longitudinal studies. https://osf.io/q97yv/, The review protocol was developed a priori and has been made publicly available through the Open Science Framework (OSF) to enhance transparency and reproducibility.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.