Key result
Social isolation is linked to a ~27% higher obesity risk.
Why the study?
Do sociodemographic disadvantage, unhealthy lifestyles, and social isolation increase the risk of obesity in a working population?
Cross-Sectional (n=117,298)
Yes
Do sociodemographic disadvantage, unhealthy lifestyles, and social isolation increase the risk of obesity in a working population?
Social isolation is an independent determinant of obesity in the working population, highlighting the need to incorporate psychosocial dimensions into cardiometabolic prevention strategies.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Social isolation assessment may inform workplace cardiometabolic risk stratification; leaves open causal effects and intervention benefits.
Background: Obesity is a multifactorial condition shaped by biological, behavioral, socioeconomic, and psychosocial determinants. While lifestyle correlates are well documented, the impact of social isolation on obesity in occupational settings remains insufficiently explored. This study examined associations between sociodemographic variables, health behaviors, and social isolation with multiple obesity indices in a large cohort of Spanish workers. Methods: We analyzed 117298 employees across Spain (2021-2024). Obesity was defined using body mass index (BMI), waist-to-height ratio (WtHR), Clínica Universidad de Navarra-Body Adiposity Estimator (CUN-BAE), and Metabolic Score for Visceral Fat (METS-VF). Sociodemographic data, lifestyle habits, and social isolation (ENRICHD Social Support Instrument, ESSI) were obtained through standardized protocols. Multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Obesity prevalence ranged from 20.4% (BMI) to 39.6% (METS-VF). Male sex (OR up to 2.11, 95% CI 2.05-2.18), older age (OR 2.83, 95% CI 2.71-2.96 for ≥55 years vs. <35), and lower social class (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.54-1.71) were consistently associated with obesity across all indices. Poor adherence to the Mediterranean diet and physical inactivity increased the likelihood of obesity (OR 1.35 and 1.41, respectively). Social isolation independently predicted higher obesity risk (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.21-1.33), even after adjusting for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors. Associations remained robust in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Obesity in Spanish workers is strongly associated with sociodemographic disadvantage, unhealthy lifestyles, and psychosocial vulnerability. Social isolation emerged as a novel determinant, reinforcing the need for multidimensional public health strategies that integrate lifestyle promotion, reduction of socioeconomic inequalities, and enhancement of social connectedness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sbert et al. (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Obesity (n=117,298). Social isolation vs. Normal social support was evaluated on Obesity risk (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.21-1.33, p=<0.001). Social isolation independently predicted a higher risk of obesity (OR 1.27) in a large cohort of Spanish workers, even after adjusting for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: