Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The association between neighborhood social and built environment on loneliness among young adults with cancer

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Survivorship Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Young adults with cancer (YAs, aged 18–39) are at increased risk of experiencing loneliness due to their unique challenges of coping with a cancer diagnosis and treatment during young adulthood. Understanding factors that impact loneliness is critical to improving survivorship outcomes for this vulnerable YA population. Neighborhoods are key determinants of health. However, little is known about how such neighborhood characteristics are associated with loneliness among YA survivors.

Methods

YA survivors (N = 181) drawn from the National Institutes of Health All of Us Research Program completed measures of neighborhood social environment (e.g., shared values), aspects of their neighborhood built environment (e.g., access to transit, recreational activities), and loneliness. Two total scores were calculated with higher scores reflecting higher neighborhood social cohesion and higher neighborhood walkability/bikeability (i.e., built environment). Hierarchical linear regression examined associations between the social and built environment on loneliness.

Results

Higher levels of neighborhood social cohesion (β =  − 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) =  − 0.44, − 0.11) and neighborhood walkability/bikeability (β =  − 0.15, 95% CI =  − 0.31, − 0.006) were significantly associated with lower levels of loneliness.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that living within a cohesive social environment with neighborhood walkability/bikeability to built environment amenities such as green space, grocery stores, and public transportation is protective against loneliness among YA survivors. More longitudinal research is necessary to understand the dynamic changes in loneliness among YA survivors living in diverse social and built environments.

Implications for cancer survivors

YA survivors may benefit from cultivating neighbor relationships and living within neighborhoods with walkability/bikeability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available for researchers to access from the National Institutes of Health All of Us Researcher Workbench.

References

  1. Geue K, Götze H, Friedrich M, Leuteritz K, Mehnert-Theuerkauf A, Sender A, et al. Perceived social support and associations with health-related quality of life in young versus older adult patients with haematological malignancies. Health Qual Life Outc. 2019;17(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1202-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Paskett ED, Herndon JE, Day JM, Stark NN, Winer EP, Grubbs SS, et al. Applying a conceptual model for examining health-related quality of life in long-term breast cancer survivors: CALGB study 79804. Psychooncology. 2008;17(11):1108–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1329.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Fox RS, Armstrong GE, Gaumond JS, Vigoureux TF, Miller CH, Sanford SD, et al. Social isolation and social connectedness among young adult cancer survivors: a systematic review. Cancer. 2023;129(19):2946–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.34934.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Docherty SL, Kayle M, Maslow GR, Santacroce SJ. The adolescent and young adult with cancer: a developmental life course perspective. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2015;31(3):186–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soncn.2015.05.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Erickson EH. Childhood and society. W W Norton & Co; 1963.

  6. Husson O, Zebrack BJ, Aguilar C, Hayes-Lattin B, Cole S. Cancer in adolescents and young adults: who remains at risk of poor social functioning over time? Cancer. 2017;123(14):2743–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30656.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Knox MK, Hales S, Nissim R, Jung J, Lo C, Zimmermann C, et al. Lost and stranded: the experience of younger adults with advanced cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25:399–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-016-3415-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lidington E, Vlooswijk C, Stallard K, Travis E, Younger E, Edwards P, et al. ‘This is not part of my life plan’: a qualitative study on the psychosocial experiences and practical challenges in young adults with cancer age 25 to 39 years at diagnosis. Eur J Cancer. 2021;30(5): e13458. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hauken MA, Larsen TMB. Young adult cancer patients’ experiences of private social network support during cancer treatment. J Clin Nurs. 2019;28(15–16):2953–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14899.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hauken MA, Larsen TMB, Holsen I. Meeting reality: young adult cancer survivors’ experiences of reentering everyday life after cancer treatment. Cancer Nurs. 2013;36(5):E17–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0b013e318278d4fc.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Trevino KM, Fasciano K, Block S, Prigerson HG. Correlates of social support in young adults with advanced cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2013;21:421–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1536-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zebrack B, Kwak M, Sundstrom L. First Descents, an adventure program for young adults with cancer: who benefits? Support Care Cancer. 2017;25:3665–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3792-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gomez SL, Shariff-Marco S, DeRouen M, Keegan TH, Yen IH, Mujahid M, et al. The impact of neighborhood social and built environment factors across the cancer continuum: current research, methodological considerations, and future directions. Cancer. 2015;121(14):2314–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jackson RJ. The impact of the built environment on health: an emerging field. Am J Public Health. 2003;93:1382–84.

  15. Renalds A, Smith TH, Hale PJ. A systematic review of built environment and health. Fam Community Health. 2010;33:68–78.

  16. Allen M, Allen J. Health inequalities and the role of the physical and social environment. In: Barton H, Thompson S, Burgess S, Grant M, editors. The Routledge handbook of planning for health and well-being. London: Routledge; 2015:89–107.

  17. Bateman LB, Fouad MN, Hawk B, Osborne T, Bae S, Eady S, et al. Examining neighborhood social cohesion in the context of community-based participatory research: descriptive findings from an academic-community partnership. Ethn Dis. 2017; 27(Suppl 1):329–36. https://doi.org/10.18865/ed.27.S1.329

  18. Kim ES, Chen Y, Kawachi I, VanderWeele TJ. Perceived neighborhood social cohesion and subsequent health and well-being in older adults: an outcome-wide longitudinal approach. Health Place. 2020;66: 102420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2020.102420.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Kawachi I, Berkman L. Social cohesion, social capital, and health. In: Berkman LF, editor. Social Epidemiology. Oxford University Press; 2000. p. 290–319.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Beard JR, Cerdá M, Blaney S, Ahern J, Vlahov D, Galea S. Neighborhood characteristics and change in depressive symptoms among older residents of New York City. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(7):1308–14. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2007.125104.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Berke EM, Gottlieb LM, Moudon AV, Larson EB. Protective association between neighborhood walkability and depression in older men. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(4):526–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01108.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Stafford M, Chandola T, Marmot M. Association between fear of crime and mental health and physical functioning. Am J Public Health. 2007;97(11):2076–81. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2006.097154.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Yen IH, Syme SL. The social environment and health: a discussion of the epidemiologic literature. Annu Rev Public Health. 1999;20(1):287–308. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.20.1.287.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Moore T, Kesten J, López-López JA, Ijaz S, McAleenan A, Richards A, Gray S, Savović J, Audrey S. The effects of changes to the built environment on the mental health and well-being of adults: systematic review. Health Place. 2018;53:237–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.07.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Shariff-Marco S, Von Behren J, Reynolds P, Keegan TH, Hertz A, Kwan ML, et al. Impact of social and built environment factors on body size among breast cancer survivors: the pathways study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017;26(4):505–15. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0932.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Stevens CJ, Liao Y, Chen M, Heredia NI, Arem H, Sukumar J, et al. Linking social and built environmental factors to leisure-time physical activity in rural cancer survivors. JNCI Monographs. 2023;2023(61):125–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimonographs/lgad004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. World Health Organization. Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health: Commission on Social Determinants of Health final report: World Health Organization; 2008.

  28. Gómez CA, Kleinman DV, Pronk N, Gordon GLW, Ochiai E, Blakey C, et al. Practice full report: addressing health equity and social determinants of health through healthy people 2030. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2021;27(6):S249. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001297.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Artiga S, Hinton E. Beyond health care: the role of social determinants in promoting health and health equity. San Francisco: Kaiser Family Foundation. 2018:1–13.

  30. Bronfenbrenner U. Toward an experimental ecology of human development. Am Psychol. 1977;32(7):513. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Golden SD, Earp JAL. Social ecological approaches to individuals and their contexts: twenty years of health education & behavior health promotion interventions. Health Educ Behav. 2012;39(3):364–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198111418634.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hays RD, DiMatteo MR. A short-form measure of loneliness. J Pers Assess. 1987;51(1):69–81. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5101_6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ. 1997;314(7080):572.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Bauman A, Bull F, Chey T, Craig CL, Ainsworth BE, Sallis JF, et al. The international prevalence study on physical activity: results from 20 countries. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2009;6:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-6-21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Sallis JF, Bowles HR, Bauman A, Ainsworth BE, Bull FC, Craig CL, et al. Neighborhood environments and physical activity among adults in 11 countries. Am J of Prev Med. 2009;36(6):484–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2009.01.031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Falvo MJ, Earhart GM. Six-minute walk distance in persons with Parkinson disease: a hierarchical regression model. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(6):1004–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.12.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. All of Us Research Program. Data and statistics dissemination policy. 2020. https://www.researchallofus.org/wp-content/themes/research-hub-wordpress-theme/media/2020/05/AoU_Policy_Data_and_Statistics_Dissemination_508.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2023.

  38. Tulk J, Garland SN, Howden K, Glidden C, Scott I, Chalifour K, et al. Prevalence and factors associated with insomnia symptoms in adolescents and young adults with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sleep Health. 2022;8(4):410–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleh.2022.04.005.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Bender JL, Akinnibosun R, Puri N, D’Agostino N, Drake EK, Tsimicalis A, et al. A comparison of the sociodemographic, medical, and psychosocial characteristics of adolescents and young adults diagnosed with cancer recruited in-person and online: a Canadian cross-sectional survey. Digit Health. 2023;9:20552076231205280. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231205278.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Warner EL, Kent EE, Trevino KM, Parsons HM, Zebrack BJ, Kirchhoff AC. Social well-being among adolescents and young adults with cancer: a systematic review. Cancer. 2016;122(7):1029–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29866.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Lazard AJ, Saffer AJ, Horrell L, Benedict C, Love B. Peer-to-peer connections: perceptions of a social support app designed for young adults with cancer. Psychooncology. 2020;29(1):173–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5220.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Breuer N, Sender A, Daneck L, Mentschke L, Leuteritz K, Friedrich M, et al. How do young adults with cancer perceive social support? A qualitative study. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2017;35(3):292–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2017.1289290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Iannarino NT, Scott AM, Shaunfield SL. Normative social support in young adult cancer survivors. Qual Health Res. 2017;27(2):271–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315627645.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Steptoe A, Shankar A, Demakakos P, Wardle J. Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110(15):5797–801. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1219686110.

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Wang F, Gao Y, Han Z, Yu Y, Long Z, Jiang X, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 90 cohort studies of social isolation, loneliness and mortality. Nat Hum Behav. 2023:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01617-6

  46. Gan DR, Cheng GH-L, Ng TP, Gwee X, Soh CY, Fung JC, Cho IS. Neighborhood makes or breaks active ageing? Findings from cross-sectional path analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(6):3695. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063695.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Schootman M, Gomez SL, Henry KA, Paskett ED, Ellison GL, Oh A, et al. Geospatial approaches to cancer control and population sciences. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017;26(4):472–5. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0104.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Koohsari MJ, Nakaya T, McCormack GR, Oka K. Built environment design and cancer prevention through the lens of inequality. Cities. 2021;119: 103385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Iyer HS, Zeinomar N, Omilian AR, Perlstein M, Davis MB, Omene CO, et al. Neighborhood disadvantage, African genetic ancestry, cancer subtype, and mortality among breast cancer survivors. JAMA Network Open. 2023;6(8):e2331295-e. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.31295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Iyer HS, Vaselkiv JB, Stopsack KH, Roscoe C, DeVille NV, Zhang Y, et al. Influence of neighborhood social and natural environment on prostate tumor histology in a cohort of male health professionals. Am J Epidem. 2023;192(9):1485–98. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwad112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Miller KD, Fidler-Benaoudia M, Keegan TH, Hipp HS, Jemal A, Siegel RL. Cancer statistics for adolescents and young adults. CA: Cancer J Clin. 2020;70(6):443–59. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21637.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Levasseur M, Généreux M, Bruneau J-F, Vanasse A, Chabot É, Beaulac C, et al. Importance of proximity to resources, social support, transportation and neighborhood security for mobility and social participation in older adults: results from a scoping study. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):503. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1824-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The All of Us Research Program is supported by the National Institutes of Health, Office of the Director: Regional Medical Centers: 1 OT2 OD026549, 1 OT2 OD026554, 1 OT2 OD026557, 1 OT2 OD026556, 1 OT2 OD026550, 1 OT2 OD 026552, 1 OT2 OD026553, 1 OT2 OD026548, 1 OT2 OD026551, 1 OT2 OD026555; IAA #: AOD 16037; Federally Qualified Health Centers: HHSN 263201600085U; Data and Research Center: 5 U2C OD023196; Biobank: 1 U24 OD023121; The Participant Center: U24 OD023176; Participant Technology Systems Center: 1 U24 OD023163; Communications and Engagement: 3 OT2 OD023205, 3 OT2 OD023206; and Community Partners: 1 OT2 OD025277, 3 OT2 OD025315, 1 OT2 OD025337, 1 OT2 OD025276. In addition, the All of Us Research Program would not be possible without the partnership of its participants.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Behavior, Society, and Policy, Rutgers School of Public Health, The State University of New Jersey, 683 Hoes Lane West, Rm 327, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA

    Katie Darabos

  2. Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany Street, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA

    Katie Darabos, Sharon L. Manne & Katie A. Devine

Authors
  1. Katie Darabos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sharon L. Manne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katie A. Devine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Data preparation and analysis were performed by K.D. The first draft of the manuscript was written by K.D. and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katie Darabos.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The All of Us research program is approved by the NIH Institutional Review Board.

Consent to participate

All of Us participants sign an informed consent form authorizing collection of their data.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Darabos, K., Manne, S.L. & Devine, K.A. The association between neighborhood social and built environment on loneliness among young adults with cancer. J Cancer Surviv (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-024-01563-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-024-01563-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation