| Course | HCA 502 Research and Program Evaluation Issues in Aging |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 4 |
| Paper type | Quantitative article assessment |
| Length | About 572 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | MA in Aging |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HCA 502 Module 4
Loneliness as a Risk Factor: Assessing a Quantitative Study of Functional Decline and Death in Older Adults
Student Name
MA in Aging, Arizona State University
HCA 502: Research and Program Evaluation Issues in Aging
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Loneliness as a Risk Factor: Assessing a Quantitative Study of Functional Decline and Death in Older Adults
Article
Perissinotto et al. (2012) examined whether loneliness predicts functional decline and death among U.S. adults older than 60.
Research Question and Rationale
The authors asked whether older adults who feel lonely are more likely than others to lose function and to die over six years. The rationale was that loneliness is common and distressing but had rarely been studied as a predictor of hard outcomes in a national U.S. sample.
Design
The study is a longitudinal cohort analysis of existing survey data. Loneliness was measured in 2002, and participants were reassessed every two years through 2008. Because exposure was measured before outcomes, the design can establish time order, a strength over cross-sectional surveys, but it cannot prove causation.
Sample
Participants were 1,604 respondents to the psychosocial module of the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative study of older Americans. Their mean age was 71; 59% were women, 81% White, 11% Black and 6% Hispanic, and 18% lived alone.
Measures
Loneliness was measured with three questions: how often participants felt left out, felt isolated or lacked companionship. Those answering "some of the time" or "often" to any item were classified as lonely. Outcomes were death and four measures of functional decline: more difficulty with activities of daily living, upper-extremity tasks, mobility and stair climbing.
Analysis
The authors used multivariable models adjusting for demographics, socioeconomic status, living situation, depression and medical conditions, reporting adjusted risk ratios for decline and a hazard ratio for death.
Results
Forty-three percent of participants reported loneliness. Lonely participants were more likely to decline in activities of daily living (24.8% versus 12.5%; adjusted risk ratio 1.59) and to die within six years (22.8% versus 14.2%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 1.88). Associations with mobility decline were weaker and did not reach statistical significance (Perissinotto et al., 2012).
| Outcome | Lonely | Not lonely | Adjusted estimate (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Decline in daily activities | 24.8% | 12.5% | RR 1.59 (1.23 to 2.07) |
| Difficulty climbing stairs | 40.8% | 27.9% | RR 1.31 (1.10 to 1.57) |
| Death | 22.8% | 14.2% | HR 1.45 (1.11 to 1.88) |
Strengths
The sample is national and the study follows people over time. Measures of outcome are standard in aging research. Adjusting for depression is important, since depression could explain both loneliness and decline. The findings agree with a meta-analysis of 148 studies in which stronger social relationships were associated with 50% greater odds of survival (Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010).
Threats to Validity
Loneliness was measured once with a brief scale and a generous cutoff, so some participants may have been misclassified, and loneliness could have changed during follow-up. Residual confounding is possible: unmeasured factors such as early cognitive decline could cause both loneliness and functional loss. Self-reported function may be biased. The sample was largely White, limiting conclusions for other groups.
Usefulness for Practice
The study supports screening for loneliness in older adults and treating it as a health risk rather than a private feeling. It does not show that reducing loneliness would prevent decline; that requires intervention trials, such as a randomized trial in which layperson telephone calls reduced loneliness among Meals on Wheels clients within four weeks (Kahlon et al., 2021).
Overall Assessment
This is a well-designed, clearly reported cohort study with a credible association between loneliness and later decline and death. Its main limitation is the single, brief loneliness measure.
References
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review. PLOS Medicine, 7(7), e1000316. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316
Kahlon, M. K., Aksan, N., Aubrey, R., Clark, N., Cowley-Morillo, M., Jacobs, E. A., Mundhenk, R., Sebastian, K. R., & Tomlinson, S. (2021). Effect of layperson-delivered, empathy-focused program of telephone calls on loneliness, depression, and anxiety among adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry, 78(6), 616-622. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.0113
Perissinotto, C. M., Stijacic Cenzer, I., & Covinsky, K. E. (2012). Loneliness in older persons: A predictor of functional decline and death. Archives of Internal Medicine, 172(14), 1078-1083. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2012.1993
HCA 502 Module 4 instructions, in plain terms
The quantitative Peer-Reviewed Article Assessment in HCA 502 is worth 125 points, one of two article assessments in the course. Choose a quantitative, peer-reviewed study on an aging issue, ideally related to the topic you will develop for your final report, and assess it using the concepts from the course's modules on research questions and quantitative methods. Most assessments cover the research question, design, sample, measures, analysis, results, strengths, threats to validity and usefulness. Follow the instructor's template or rubric in Canvas and write in APA style, citing the article and any other sources you use. Note the sample size early.
Inside the HCA 502 Module 4 example
The sample identifies the article and states its question and rationale. Short sections then describe the cohort design and the limits of what it proves, the sample with its demographics, the loneliness and outcome measures and the adjusted analysis. Results appear in text and in a small table with confidence intervals. Strengths are linked to a meta-analysis, threats to validity are explained one by one, and the assessment closes with practical implications and an overall judgment. The table reports three outcomes with confidence intervals, which makes the strength and precision of each finding visible. The overall assessment balances strengths and limits in two sentences, which is what a busy practitioner reading the assessment would want.
Reading the HCA 502 Module 4 grading rubric
Each article assessment is worth 125 points. Readers check that the student correctly identifies the design and its implications, describes measures and analysis accurately, interprets the main results, including precision, and evaluates validity with specific threats rather than generic statements. Marks drop when the assessment summarizes the abstract without evaluation, when causal language is used for an observational study, when limitations are listed without explaining their effect and when the article chosen is not truly quantitative or peer reviewed. Strong assessments also compare the article with at least one other source and explain what the findings do and do not justify in practice. Careful attention to how the exposure was measured, here a three-item loneliness scale with a broad cutoff, often separates high scores from average ones.
HCA 502 Module 4 help with common mistakes
Read the methods section before the results. Name the design in one phrase and say what it allows you to conclude. Copy the key estimates with their confidence intervals into a table. For each threat to validity, explain how it could change the result. Compare the findings with one other study. End with what practitioners should and should not take from the article. If the statistics are unfamiliar, the desk can explain them. Read the article's limitations section, then add one the authors did not mention. Check that your article reports original data, not a review. Keep the assessment focused on evaluation rather than retelling.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HCA 502 and MA in Aging sample papers
- HCA 502 Module 5: Peer-Reviewed Article Assessment: Qualitative
- HCA 502 Module 6: Evidentiary Review Table
- HCA 502 Module 7: Paper: Research and/or Evaluation for Aging Issues Report
- HCA 507 Module 7: Final Paper: Innovations Bridging the Continuum of Care
- HCA 504 Module 3: Case Study Summary: Intergenerational Approaches to Caregiving
- HCA 508 Module 4: Paper: Understanding Aging Through the Humanities and Arts
- HCA 503 Module 7: Paper: Nomadland and Diversity in Aging
HCA 502 Module 4 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HCA 502 Module 4 sample paper?
The full assessment of a study on loneliness, functional decline and death in older adults is on this page.
What should a quantitative article assessment include?
The question, design, sample, measures, analysis, results, strengths, threats to validity and usefulness.
Does loneliness predict death in older adults?
In one national cohort, lonely adults over 60 had an adjusted hazard ratio for death of 1.45.
Can a cohort study prove causation?
No; it can show time order and association, but confounding may remain.
How many article assessments are in HCA 502?
Two, one quantitative and one qualitative, worth 125 points each.