Loneliness among parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods: a cross-sectional study in Australia

Loneliness among parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods: a cross-sectional study in Australia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Loneliness among parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods: a cross-sectional study in Australia Huiyi Liang, Eleisha Casañas, Liam Kay, Kate Rasheed, Alexandra George, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7017365/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 7 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Becoming a parent involves major shifts in identity and social networks that can heighten the risk of loneliness. Although loneliness is increasingly recognised as a significant public health issue, limited studies have systematically examined its prevalence among the general population of parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods using validated instruments. This study addresses this gap by investigating the prevalence and predictors of loneliness among Australian parents during these critical periods using high-quality, representative datasets. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in January 2025 with 907 Australian parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods. Loneliness was assessed using the UCLA Loneliness Scale and a validated single-item measure. Hierarchical linear regression analyses were conducted separately for perinatal parents (pregnant or with children under one year) and early childhood parents (children aged one to four years) to examine associations between loneliness and demographic, psychosocial, and mental health variables. Results The mean score on the UCLA-LS was 48.32 (which is higher on average than similar studies sampling older adults and people during the COVID pandemic). Greater loneliness was associated with being younger, female, single, residing in regional areas, having lower education and income levels, and not being in paid employment. Across both parenting groups, economic hardship, perceived stigma, limited social interaction, and absence of partner support consistently predicted greater loneliness. Among perinatal parents, lower education and elevated symptoms of depression and stress were significant predictors, while female sex was a key predictor among early childhood parents. Conclusions The present study demonstrated that loneliness is pervasive and severe in the perinatal and early parenting periods, representing a substantial public health concern. While economic difficulties, stigma, social disconnection, and lack of partner support were common predictors across both groups, stage-specific differences were also observed. These findings underscore the need for both universal and tailored interventions to reduce parental loneliness, including integrated mental health and social support services. The persistently high levels of loneliness across parenting stages highlight the importance of sustained, rather than time-limited, support strategies. Further longitudinal research is warranted to clarify causal relationships and inform targeted policy and practice. Loneliness Parents Perinatal period Early parenting Demographic factors Social support Stigma Cross-sectional design Australia Figures Figure 1 Background Loneliness is a negative emotional experience that arises from a gap between the social relationships one desires and those one actually has [1]. This feeling can be transient, coming and going throughout life, or chronic, persisting over time [2]. Research indicates that life transitions, especially those involving changes in social identity and networks, can heighten the risk of transient loneliness [3]. If unaddressed, this can evolve into chronic loneliness, adversely affecting physical and mental health and overall well-being [4, 5]. In recent years, loneliness has been described as one of the most pressing public health priorities [5], with 9% - 15% of Australians reporting severe loneliness (lonely often or always) [6, 7]. Research on loneliness has focused mostly on adolescents and older individuals [8, 9]. However, becoming a parent is widely recognized as a major life event that involves shifts in identity, routines, and social networks [10], suggesting that new parents face heightened vulnerability to loneliness experiences. One recent review reported that the prevalence of loneliness among parents ranges from 32 to 100% [11]. Within the perinatal period (i.e. during pregnancy and the first year following childbirth), research has highlighted the key drivers of parental loneliness to include difficulties in adjusting to parenthood, stigma around discussing struggles, being cut off from social support, and interpersonal isolation [12, 13]. Importantly, loneliness in the perinatal period may contribute to the development of mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety [14]. Moreover, Buecker et al. (2020) [15] demonstrated that loneliness experienced in the first year of parenthood could persist into later stages of parenting, underscoring the importance of addressing loneliness beyond the initial transition. Similarly, one previous longitudinal study examined both mothers’ and fathers’ loneliness from pregnancy through early childhood in Finland, demonstrating that although overall loneliness levels remained relatively stable, parents followed distinct trajectories that corresponded to different levels of marital dissatisfaction, social phobia, and depressive symptoms [16]. Despite these concerning findings, the prevalence of loneliness among parents across perinatal and early parenting periods in Australia remains unclear. Most studies on parental loneliness have focused on specific cohorts of parents, such as first-time parents, immigrant or ethnic minority parents, and parents with mental health issues [1, 12, 17–19]. In studies that have examined loneliness among parents more broadly, many have used qualitative methods [1, 20]. For example, a thematic analysis of UK parent-authored blogs revealed pervasive feelings of disconnection, identity loss, and unmet social needs among parents experiencing loneliness [21]. However, few studies have utilized validated measurement instruments to systematically examine loneliness prevalence among parents during these critical transition periods [22]. A scoping review noted that loneliness in parents is rarely studied as a primary outcome, with most research exploring it as a secondary issue or outcome [11]. As a result, current understanding of parental loneliness is often contextualized within other challenges rather than examined as a primary concern, and there remains a lack of research investigating contributing factors among the general parenting population using high-quality, representative datasets. Establishing a clear understanding of the experiences of loneliness and identifying the parents who are at increased risk are critical steps for guiding effective support strategies and informing future research. This study therefore aimed to examine loneliness among Australian parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods using a cross-sectional survey. Methods Study design The study employed a cross-sectional design, utilizing an anonymous online survey to collect data. The survey was developed by Friends for Good [23], a national not-for-profit organization in Australia focused on loneliness prevention, and researchers at Monash University and University of Melbourne. The research team collaborated with Nature (a strategic insights company) [24], and PureProfile (an online survey community) [25] to capture the data during January 2025. The study received ethics approval from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval No. 45562). Participants Inclusion criteria for survey participation required respondents to be Australian citizens or permanent residents who were currently pregnant, partners of pregnant individuals, or parents of children aged four years or younger. A total of 907 individuals completed the questionnaire. During data preparation, 33 participants were excluded due to biologically impossible responses (specifically, male respondents indicating pregnancy or childbirth). The final analytical sample comprised 874 parents. Measures To examine associations between demographic, psychosocial, and health-related factors and loneliness across different parenting stages, participants were classified into two groups based on the parenting stage. Perinatal parents included those who were currently pregnant, partners of pregnant individuals, or parents with children under one year of age. Early childhood parents comprised those with all children aged between one and four years. Independent variables were organized into two primary categories: demographic factors and psychosocial factors. The primary outcome variable was loneliness. Perinatal mental health screening was conducted to assess relevant psychological factors among perinatal parents, given that the perinatal period is widely recognized as a time of increased mental health risk [26, 27]. Demographic factors On the basis of previous research linking demographic factors to loneliness, we assessed a range of variables expected to influence loneliness [10, 11, 28]. Basic demographic variables included age, sex, sexual orientation, relationship status, residential region, education level, and employment status . Relationship status was categorized as "in a relationship" (including those living together or separately) or "single." The residential region was coded as "metropolitan" or "regional/rural" based on postcode data. The highest level of education completed was classified into three categories: university degree (undergraduate and postgraduate), high school degree or lower, and trade certificate or diploma. Employment status was organized into three groups: having paid employment (including full-time and part-time or casual positions), full-time caring duties (including parenting), and not having paid employment (including individuals who were volunteering, studying, receiving disability support, or retired). For employed respondents, work arrangements were further classified as work from home, work from office or in-person, or hybrid arrangements combining both locations. Two demographic indicators assessed economic status. First, household income was recorded into five levels: (1) ≥$150,000, (2) $130,000–$149,000, (3) $90,000–$129,999, (4) $50,000–$89,999, and (5) $0–$49,999. Second, self‐described economic status was recoded into two categories: ‘having difficulties’ (responses including “I really can’t make ends meet” and “I just about get by with the income I have now”) and ‘not having difficulties’ (responses including “I have enough to get along and even a little extra” and “I can buy pretty much anything I want with the money I have”). Country of birth and language spoken at home served as proxy indicators of migrant status. Country of birth was coded as "Australia" or "Non-Australia" based on a comprehensive list of countries including Australia, England, New Zealand, India, Italy, Vietnam, Philippines, China, and others. Language spoken at home was categorized as "English" or "other." All survey items included an option for respondents to select "Prefer not to say." Psychosocial Factors The psychosocial factors included perceived social connection, partner support and stigma related to loneliness . Perceived social connection was assessed via a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree, strongly agree) with two items: "I am satisfied with the level of social connection I have" and "There are barriers for me to be able to engage with friends, family, and neighbors." Additionally, one item developed specifically for this survey measured perceived partner support [29], “I have a supportive partner”. Perceived stigma was captured using two items from a previously administered loneliness survey in Australia [7]. These items were scored on a five-point Likert scale and included perceived community stigma toward loneliness ("People often feel ashamed or embarrassed to tell others if they are feeling lonely") and personal stigma representing individuals' own attitudes toward loneliness ("I would feel embarrassed or ashamed to tell others I was feeling lonely"). Perinatal Mental Health Screening In accordance with the National Perinatal Mental Health Guideline [30], the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21) [31] was administered exclusively to perinatal parents to explore the relationship between perinatal mental health status and loneliness. This 21-item scale includes three subscales measuring depression, anxiety, and stress, with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms. In the present study, Cronbach’s α coefficient was .96. Loneliness Loneliness was measured using both the UCLA Loneliness Scale Version 3 (UCLA-LS) [32] and a single-item measure recommended by the Office for National Statistics [33]. The UCLA-LS is a 20-item self-report measure in which participants rate each item on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 4 (Often) [32]. Total scores range from 20 to 80, with higher scores reflecting greater degrees of loneliness. The internal consistency of the UCLA-LS in the present study was good (α = 0.87). The single-item measurement of loneliness ("How often do you feel lonely?") was used as an adjunct measure, with response options including often/always, some of the time, occasionally, hardly ever, and never [34, 35]. Data analysis Since a clinical cut-off point has not yet been established for the UCLA-LS scale, significant variation exists in UCLA-LS scoring thresholds used in prior research, depending on the population studied. For example, one study classified parents with cancer as lonely when scoring above the sample median of 45 [36], whereas another applied a fixed cutoff score of 40 for university students [4]. To address potential interpretation challenges, we employed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to identify the optimal cut-off score on the UCLA-LS for dichotomizing loneliness, validated against the single-item measure [34, 35]. Responses of "often/always" and "some of the time" on the single-item measure were categorized as indicating loneliness, aligning with prior research [34]. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve were calculated to determine the optimal UCLA-LS cut-off for classifying loneliness. Cohen’s kappa (κ) was used to quantify the agreement between the measures. Loneliness was retained as a continuous variable in subsequent analyses to maximize statistical power and preserve response variability [37]. Demographic characteristics, parental groups, and UCLA-LS scores were summarized using means with standard deviations (SD) for continuous variables and frequencies with percentages for categorical variables. A two-step analytical approach was employed to identify multivariate correlates of loneliness. First, bivariate analyses were conducted using independent samples t-tests or one-way ANOVA to compare mean loneliness scores across groups defined by categorical variables, while Pearson's or Spearman's correlation coefficients assessed associations between loneliness and continuous or ordinal variables. The data with “prefer not to say” resulted from single items that were excluded from analysis. Second, variables showing significant associations (p < 0.05) in bivariate analyses were entered into hierarchical linear regression models. Separate hierarchical regression models were constructed for perinatal and early childhood parents to account for differences in parenting contexts. For both groups, Model 1 adjusted for demographic characteristics, Model 2 added psychosocial factor variables to test their associations with loneliness while adjusting for demographic effects. For perinatal parents, model 3 included mental health indicators to assess their additional contribution while adjusting for demographic and psychosocial factors. Results Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis ROC analysis demonstrated strong concordance between the UCLA-LS and the single-item loneliness measure (AUC = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.79–0.87, Figure 1). The optimal UCLA-LS cutoff score of 47 or higher maximized sensitivity (90%) and specificity (59%), with a Youden's J statistic of 0.49. Cohen's kappa indicated moderate agreement between the two measures (κ = 0.48, p < 0.001). Descriptive analysis Participant characteristics The study included 874 Australian parents with a mean age of 34.47 years (SD = 6.20). A total of 605 participants (69.7%) were perinatal parents (pregnant or with children under one year), and 269 participants (30.3%) were early childhood parents (children aged one to four years). All demographic characteristics are detailed in Table 1. Table 1 Demographics and descriptive characteristics of participants and their test results Relationship with Loneliness score Variable Category Count (%) or Mean (SD) Mean Loneliness Score (SD) p-value Effect size Parenting Stage 0.23 -0.09 Perinatal Parents (expectant and children <1 year) 605 (69.7%) 48.04 (9.51) Early Childhood Parents (children 1–4 years) 269 (30.3%) 48.96 (10.98) Age - 34.47 (6.20) 0.04 -0.07 Sex 0.047 -0.15 Female 607 (70.3%) 48.88 (10.01) Male 256 (29.7%) 47.42 (9.72) Prefer not to say 9 Sexual Orientation 0.03 -0.29 Heterosexual 794 (92.5%) 48.25 (9.93) Non-heterosexual 64 (7.5%) 51.0 (9.11) Prefer not to say 16 Relationship Status 0.006 -0.35 In a relationship 790 (92.4%) 48.23 (9.90) Single 65 (7.6%) 51.72 (9.78) Prefer not to say 19 Region 0.004 0.22 Metro 645 (73.8%) 47.75 (10.01) Regional/rural 229 (26.2%) 49.94 (9.78) Education Level <0.001 0.03 University 542 (62.8%) 47.10 (9.78) Trade certificate or diploma 202 (23.4%) 50.33 (9.78) High School or lower 119 (13.8%) 51.39 (9.90) Prefer not to say 11 Employment Status 0.006 0.01 Having a paid job 727 (83.8%) 47.84 (9.68) Full time caring duties 108 (12.4%) 49.90 (11.16) not having a paid job 33 (3.8%) 52.52 (10.47) Prefer not to say 6 Work Arrangement 0.88 0.002 Work from an office/ in-person 388 (53.8%) 48.28 (9.98) Hybrid (both work from home and in an office) 252 (35.0%) 47.27 (9.48) Work from home 81 (11.2%) 48.59 (8.92) Others (not employed) 155 Household Income <0.001 -0.16 $150,000+ 269 (32.6%) 46.72 (9.95) $130,000-$149,000 146 (17.7%) 46.97 (10.63) $90,000-$129,999 208 (25.2%) 49.85 (8.78) $50,000-$89,999 155 (18.8%) 50.14 (9.38) $0-$49,999 47 (5.7%) 51.81 (10.88) Prefer not to say 49 Economic Situation (Original question: "How would you describe your economic situation?") <0.001 0.51 Some/many difficulties 468 (53.5%) 50.62 (9.31) No difficulties 406 (46.5%) 45.68 (10.11) Country of Birth 0.10 0.002 Australia 714 (82.5%) 48.41 (10.03) Non-Australia 151 (17.5%) 48.40 (9.78) Prefer not to say 9 Language at Home 0.84 0.03 English 822 (95.0%) 48.41 (10.0) Other languages (e.g. Mandarin, Hindi, etc.) 43 (5.0%) 48.09 (9.34) Prefer not to say 9 Note. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen's d for t-tests, eta-squared (η²) for ANOVA, and Pearson’s or Spearman’s correlation coefficient for correlation analysis. *** = p-value < 0.001, ** = p-value < 0.01, * = p-value < 0.05 Loneliness Prevalence For the single-item measurement of loneliness, 10.6% of parents reported feeling lonely often or always, and 35.8% reported feeling lonely some of the time. The mean UCLA-LS score was 48.32 (SD = 9.99, median = 50.0, interquartile range = 42–55, range = 21–78). Using the UCLA-LS cutoff score identified through ROC analysis, 63.7% of participants were classified as experiencing high levels of loneliness with scores of 47 or higher, while 36.3% were classified as experiencing low levels of loneliness. Bivariate analysis Loneliness and demographic variables Associations between loneliness and demographic factors were examined as presented in Table 1. Sex and sexual orientation were significantly associated with loneliness, with males and heterosexual individuals reporting lower loneliness levels. Individuals residing in rural or regional areas reported greater levels of loneliness compared to those in metropolitan regions ( t = 2.86, p = 0.004). Similarly, single participants exhibited greater levels of loneliness than those in relationships ( t = −2.74, p = 0.006). However, country of birth and language spoken at home were not significantly associated with loneliness (p > 0.05 ). Education level emerged as a significant factor ( F = 14.23, p < 0.001). Participants with university education reported significantly lower loneliness scores than those with high school education ( p < 0.001) and those with trade certificates or diplomas ( p 0.05). Economic situation demonstrated strong associations with loneliness. Participants who reported experiencing economic difficulties had significantly higher loneliness scores ( t = 7.47, p < 0.001). Household income was negatively associated with loneliness. Employment status was significantly associated with loneliness ( F = 5.16, p = 0.006). Post hoc comparisons indicated that participants without paid employment reported significantly greater loneliness than those with paid jobs ( p = 0.02). However, no statistically significant differences were found between full-time caring duties and other employment groups ( p > 0.05). Additionally, no significant differences were observed across work arrangements among those with paid jobs ( p > 0.05). Psychosocial factors and loneliness Spearman correlation analyses revealed a significant positive association between loneliness and stigma ( ρ = 0.36, p < 0.001), and moderate negative associations with social interaction ( ρ = −0.64, p < 0.001) and having a supportive partner ( ρ = −0.41, p < 0.001). Perinatal Mental health and loneliness As shown in Table 2, the DASS-21 was administered to assess mental health symptoms among perinatal parents. Pearson correlation analyses revealed statistically significant moderate to strong positive associations with loneliness. Table 2 Pearson correlations between DASS scores and loneliness scores Variable Mean (SD) r Depression 6.87 (5.16) 0.59*** Anxiety 6.25 (4.87) 0.43*** Stress 8.48 (4.45) 0.51*** Note. *** p < 0.001 Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Loneliness Predictors of Loneliness for Perinatal Parents All study characteristics were organized into three sets and analyzed through hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Model 1 included nine demographic characteristics: age, residential region, relationship status, education level, employment status, economic situation, household income, sex, and sexual orientation. Model 2 incorporated three psychosocial factors: stigma associated with loneliness, social interaction, and perceived supportive partner. Model 3 included mental health indicators comprising depression, anxiety, and stress. As shown in Table 3, demographic predictors in Model 1 explained 9.7% of the variance in loneliness scores ( F (11, 544) = 5.32, p < 0.001). Having a university education was a significant negative predictor of loneliness ( β = −2.45, p = 0.044), while reporting economic difficulties was a significant positive predictor ( β = 3.50, p < 0.001). After controlling for demographics and introducing psychosocial factors in Model 2, results revealed statistically significant correlations with loneliness, with 53.0% of variability explained ( F (14, 541) = 43.52, p < 0.001). The explanatory variance increased by 43.3%, with stigma serving as a positive predictor ( β = 1.48, p < 0.001), while social interaction ( β = −4.63, p < 0.001) and having a supportive partner ( β = −2.44, p < 0.001) were strong negative predictors. After incorporating mental health indicators in Model 3, the total explanatory variance increased to 59.9% ( F (17, 538) = 47.32, p < 0.001), with mental health variables contributing an additional 6.9% of explained variance. Depression ( β = 2.08, p < 0.001) and stress ( β = 0.96, p = 0.037) emerged as statistically significant predictors of loneliness. Table 3 Hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting loneliness among Perinatal Parents (N = 554) Variable Model 1β Model 2β Model 3β Demographics Education Level (University) -2.45* -1.38 1.39* Economic Difficulties 3.51*** 1.35* 0.78 Psychosocial Factors Social Connection -4.63*** -3.91*** Supportive Partner -2.44*** -1.77*** Stigma 1.48*** 1.03*** Perinatal Mental Health Indicator Depression 2.08*** Stress 0.97* R2 0.10 0.53 0.60 Adjusted R2 0.08 0.52 0.59 F 5.32*** 43.52*** 47.32*** *P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001 Predictors of Loneliness for Early Childhood parents The results of hierarchical regression predicting loneliness from demographic characteristics and psychosocial factors are presented in Table 4. Model 1 examined the role of demographic characteristics in predicting loneliness scores. Results indicated that demographic variables accounted for 12.2% of the variance in loneliness scores ( R² = 0.12, F (11, 238) = 2.99, p < 0.001). Economic difficulties emerged as a significant positive predictor of loneliness ( β = 4.02, p = 0.006), while being male was associated with lower loneliness scores ( β = −3.47, p = 0.040). After controlling for demographic characteristics, psychosocial variables accounted for a significant 44.4% increase in the model's predictive value, resulting in a total R² of 0.57 ( F (14, 235) = 21.91, p < 0.001). In this model, stigma ( β = 2.00, p < 0.001), social interaction ( β = −5.92, p < 0.001), and having a supportive partner ( β = −2.31, p < 0.001) all emerged as significant predictors. Table 4 Hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting loneliness among early childhood parents (N = 238) Variable Model 1β Model 2β Demographics Economic Difficulties 4.02** 2.72** Sex (Male) -3.47* -1.53 Psychosocial Factors Social Connection -5.92*** Supportive Partner -2.32*** Stigma 2.00*** R2 0.12 0.57 Adjusted R2 0.08 0.54 F 2.99*** 21.91*** *P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001 Discussion Loneliness is increasingly recognized as a critical public health concern, yet limited research has applied validated measures to examine its prevalence among parents during critical transition periods [38]. This study addressed this gap by exploring associations between demographic, psychosocial, and health-related factors and loneliness among Australian parents during perinatal and early parenting periods, while examining whether predictors vary across different parenting stages. The findings reveal concerning levels of loneliness among perinatal and early childhood parents in Australia. Using a single-item measure ("how often are you lonely?"), 46.4% of Australian parents experienced loneliness (10.6% often/always, 35.8% some of the time), substantially exceeding rates observed in older adults (28-32%) during pre-pandemic to COVID-19 periods in a nationally representative American study [34]. Moreover, the mean UCLA loneliness scale score of 48.32 among parents considerably exceeded scores reported in other population groups, including older Australians (mean = 35.61) [39] and national surveys conducted before (mean = 42.15) and during (mean = 47.15) the COVID-19 pandemic [40]. These elevated scores demonstrate the severity of loneliness experienced by parents and underscore the urgent need for targeted interventions during these critical life stages. Based on bivariate analysis results, parents who were younger, female, lived in regional areas, had single relationship status, lower education levels, economic difficulties, lower household income, and unemployment experienced greater loneliness. These findings align with broader loneliness research documenting relationships between demographic factors and loneliness [41, 42]. Notably, the study identified significant disparities based on sexual orientation, with non-heterosexual parents reporting significantly greater loneliness than heterosexual parents, consistent with meta-analytic evidence demonstrating elevated loneliness levels among sexual minorities [28]. This finding likely reflects the additional social challenges and discrimination faced by parents who do not conform to traditional societal expectations regarding family structures and parenting roles [43], representing the first documentation of this disparity specifically within the parent population. Interestingly, the study found no significant associations between loneliness and cultural background indicators, including country of birth and language spoken at home. This finding contrasts with previous research documenting elevated loneliness risks among culturally and linguistically diverse populations [44], suggesting that protective factors may exist within culturally diverse parenting communities in Australia. A particularly important finding was the absence of significant differences in loneliness levels between perinatal and early childhood parents. This consistently high level of loneliness across early parenting stages suggests that loneliness represents an ongoing challenge throughout the early parenting journey rather than a transient adjustment issue confined to immediate postpartum periods. This finding extends previous research that has primarily examined discrete parenting stages and indicates the need for sustained support interventions rather than time-limited programs focused solely on immediate postpartum transitions [1, 45]. The hierarchical regression analyses identified economic difficulties as the strongest predictor of loneliness across both perinatal and early childhood parent groups. This finding aligns with Friends for Good's research in 2019 [23], which revealed that financial strain serves as a significant barrier to accessing social connection opportunities. Economic strain may limit parents' ability to participate in social activities, access support services, or maintain relationships requiring financial resources (e.g. babysitting costs, travel), thereby compounding feelings of isolation. This finding assumes particular significance given that early parenthood often coincides with reduced earning capacity due to career interruptions and increased financial demands [46]. In the model adjusted for demographic characteristics, psychosocial factors examined in this study demonstrated particularly strong associations with loneliness outcomes. Stigma associated with loneliness emerged as a significant predictor, suggesting that public education campaigns normalizing loneliness experiences during parenthood could serve as valuable primary prevention strategies. Additionally, social interaction levels and partner support demonstrated strong negative associations with loneliness, highlighting the importance of programs fostering peer and community connections for parents. These findings suggest that relationship-focused interventions may be valuable components of comprehensive approaches to reducing parental loneliness [29]. Although some factors appeared universal, the results clearly showed that certain predictors of loneliness varied across parenting groups. Therefore, tailored support for parents at different parenting stages is necessary. Among perinatal parents, education level emerged as a significant predictor, with those having higher university education reporting less loneliness. Education often serves as a proxy for broader socioeconomic resources [47]. More highly educated parents may have greater resources for navigating the challenges of new parenthood, including better access to information, stronger professional networks, and enhanced problem-solving skills. Moreover, extensive studies have emphasized that depression and anxiety affect a substantial proportion of parents during the perinatal stage [48–50]. The current findings extend this concern by revealing a strong association between depressive and stress symptoms and loneliness after accounting for demographic and psychosocial factors. While the cross-sectional design precludes causal interpretation, the bidirectional relationship between loneliness and mental health symptoms suggests that screening for loneliness could help identify those with psychiatric disturbances, and interventions addressing loneliness should be prioritized for those diagnosed with mental health problems. Among early childhood parents, sex emerged as a significant predictor, with females reporting greater loneliness than males. Surprisingly, this significant sex difference was not observed among perinatal parents. The absence of this pattern suggests that the perinatal period may create similar vulnerability to loneliness for both males and females, albeit through different mechanisms. Females often face intense societal expectations to naturally excel in maternal roles, creating pressure and potential loneliness when their lived experiences diverge from these idealized assumptions [12, 28]. Concurrently, biological factors including hormonal fluctuations and physical recovery may further contribute to elevated loneliness levels [51]. Simultaneously, males may assume increased caregiving responsibilities, and the combination of stigma around intensive parenting involvement and limited support resources may create comparable loneliness risks for them [52, 53]. However, this pattern shifts markedly as children transition into early childhood (ages 1-4 years). Females may shoulder disproportionate childcare responsibilities [28], whereas males often return to work and maintain broader social networks, potentially buffering against loneliness. Nevertheless, this finding represents only a partial understanding of the complex relationship between sex and parental loneliness, particularly given that our analysis does not capture the experiences of gender minorities. Given the multifaceted nature of parental loneliness and its associations with various risk factors, healthcare workers and service providers require specific training to identify and support disadvantaged parents who need additional assistance. The findings from this study emphasize the importance of further research to develop and evaluate interventions that effectively address both universal and specific risk factors for loneliness. For example, universal strategies should focus on reducing economic vulnerabilities through policy initiatives supporting parental leave and childcare assistance, while stage-specific interventions might include integrated mental health and social support programs during the perinatal period, and targeted support for mothers during the early childhood period. This comprehensive approach would create a safety net for some of the most vulnerable members of our community during critical transition periods. Limitation This study has several limitations. First, although we used the widely adopted UCLA-LS, its lack of a standard cutoff makes it difficult to estimate prevalence rates accurately. Although we derived a provisional cutoff (≥47), its generalizability requires validation in larger, diverse samples to establish population-specific norms. Second, the cross-sectional design precludes causal interpretations, leaving the directional relationships between predictors (e.g., economic hardship, mental health symptoms) and loneliness unresolved. Future research priorities should include longitudinal studies tracking loneliness trajectories from pregnancy through early childhood to establish temporal relationships and identify critical intervention windows. Third, reliance on self-report measures may introduce response bias, as parents might underreport loneliness due to social desirability concerns or stigma, particularly during what is conventionally perceived as a joyful life stage. Fourth, the narrow assessment of psychosocial factors, which relied on self-developed items to measure stigma and social interaction. Future research would benefit from employing validated and standardized measures, such as the Perceived Social Support Scale [54] and the Stigma of Loneliness Scale [55]. Finally, the overrepresentation of female participants may restrict generalizability to broader Australian parent populations, particularly regarding the experiences of male and gender-diverse individuals. Conclusion This cross-sectional study explored demographic, psychosocial, and health-related factors associated with loneliness among Australian parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods. The present study demonstrated that loneliness is pervasive and severe in this population, representing a substantial public health concern. The findings demonstrate that economic difficulties, stigma associated with loneliness, social interaction levels, and supportive partnerships were consistently associated with loneliness across all parenting stages, while other factors exhibited stage-specific associations. Specifically, education level and mental health symptoms were particularly relevant during the perinatal period, while sex differences emerged during early childhood. These differential patterns suggest the need for both universal approaches addressing shared risk factors and targeted interventions addressing stage-specific vulnerabilities. The consistently high levels of loneliness observed across parenting stages underscore the need for sustained support rather than time-limited interventions. Although longitudinal research is required to establish causal relationships between identified factors and loneliness, these findings provide important evidence to inform policy development and clinical practice aimed at reducing parental loneliness during these critical life transitions. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Ethics approval was received from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Project ID 45562). The authors confirm that all methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Study participants received an explanatory statement prior to participation that detailed the benefits and risks of the study, confidentiality, storage of data, and how to withdraw from the study. Once the participants read the explanatory statement, they were able to either take part in the study or withdraw, ensuring informed consent. Informed consent was therefore obtained from all participants. Consent for publication Not applicable. Availability of data and materials The datasets analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Funding No external funding was received for this study. Authors' contributions H.L. was the main writer of the manuscript and made substantial contributions to the study design and data analysis. E.C. designed the survey and made contributions to the conception, and wrote the initial draft of the discussion. L.K. assisted with survey development and contributed to literature review. K.R., A.G. and M.C. assisted with survey development and contributed to the interpretation of results. R.M. provided overall supervision and guidance throughout the project. All authors reviewed and commented on the submitted draft, and approved the final version of the manuscript. Acknowledgements We thank all the participants who took part in the online survey. We also express our gratitude to Nature and PureProfile for their support in distributing the survey. References Adlington K, Vasquez C, Pearce E, Wilson CA, Nowland R, Taylor BL, et al. ‘Just snap out of it’ – the experience of loneliness in women with perinatal depression: a Meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. BMC Psychiatry. 2023;23:110. Arimoto A, Tadaka E. Individual, family, and community factors related to loneliness in mothers raising children less than 3 years of age: a cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21:226. Basu A, Kim HH, Basaldua R, Choi KW, Charron L, Kelsall N, et al. A cross-national study of factors associated with women’s perinatal mental health and wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. PloS One. 2021;16:e0249780. Doryab A, Villalba DK, Chikersal P, Dutcher JM, Tumminia M, Liu X, et al. Identifying Behavioral Phenotypes of Loneliness and Social Isolation with Passive Sensing: Statistical Analysis, Data Mining and Machine Learning of Smartphone and Fitbit Data. JMIR MHealth UHealth. 2019;7:e13209. Lim MH, Eres R, Vasan S. Understanding loneliness in the twenty-first century: an update on correlates, risk factors, and potential solutions. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2020;55:793–810. Ending Loneliness Together (2023). State of the Nation Report -Social Connection in Australia 2023. https:// lonelinessawarenessweek.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/ state-of-nation-social-connection-2023.pdf Unveiling A Silent Struggle: Australian-First Research Into The Stigma of Loneliness. Friends For Good. 2023. https://friendsforgood.org.au/assets/downloads/FriendsForGood-ResearchReport-UnveilingASilentStruggle.pdf Berg-Weger M, Morley JE. Loneliness in Old Age: An Unaddressed Health Problem. J Nutr Health Aging. 2020;24:243–5. Nicolaisen M, Thorsen K. What Are Friends for? Friendships and Loneliness Over the Lifespan-From 18 to 79 Years. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2017;84:126–58. Nowland R, Thomson G, McNally L, Smith T, Whittaker K. Experiencing loneliness in parenthood: a scoping review. Perspect Public Health. 2021;141:214. Kent-Marvick J, Simonsen S, Pentecost R, Taylor E, McFarland MM. Loneliness in pregnant and postpartum people and parents of children aged 5 years or younger: a scoping review. Syst Rev. 2022;11:196. Lee K, Vasileiou K, Barnett J. ‘Lonely within the mother’: An exploratory study of first-time mothers’ experiences of loneliness. J Health Psychol. 2019;24:1334–44. Rokach A. Giving life: Loneliness, pregnancy, and motherhood. Soc Behav Personal Int J. 2004;32:691–702. Neale A, Wand A. Issues in the evaluation and treatment of anxiety and depression in migrant women in the perinatal period. Australas Psychiatry Bull R Aust N Z Coll Psychiatr. 2013;21:379–82. Buecker S, Denissen JJA, Luhmann M. A propensity-score matched study of changes in loneliness surrounding major life events. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2021;121:669–90. Junttila N, Ahlqvist-Björkroth S, Aromaa M, Rautava P, Piha J, Räihä H. Intercorrelations and developmental pathways of mothers’ and fathers’ loneliness during pregnancy, infancy and toddlerhood – STEPS study. Scand J Psychol. 2015;56:482–8. Hennegan J, Redshaw M, Kruske S. Another country, another language and a new baby: A quantitative study of the postnatal experiences of migrant women in Australia. Women Birth J Aust Coll Midwives. 2015;28:e124-133. Luoma I, Korhonen ,Marie, Puura ,Kaija, and Salmelin RK. Maternal loneliness: concurrent and longitudinal associations with depressive symptoms and child adjustment. Psychol Health Med. 2019;24:667–79. Shioda A, Tadaka E, Okochi A. Loneliness and related factors among people with schizophrenia in Japan: a cross-sectional study. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2016;23:399–408. McKenna-Plumley PE, Turner ,Rhiannon N., Yang ,Keming, and Groarke JM. Experiences of Loneliness Across the Lifespan: A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis of Qualitative Studies. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-Being. 2023;18:2223868. Nowland R, Thomson G, Cross L, Whittaker K, Gregory P, Charles JM, et al. Exploring blog narratives of parental loneliness: A thematic network analysis. Curr Res Behav Sci. 2023;5:100137. Arimoto A, Tadaka E. Reliability and validity of Japanese versions of the UCLA loneliness scale version 3 for use among mothers with infants and toddlers: a cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2019;19:105. FriendsForGood. Friends For Good. https://friendsforgood.org.au/what-we-do/research/. Accessed 24 Mar 2025. Nature | Strategic Insights. Nature. https://nature.com.au/. Accessed 3 Jun 2025. Connect to Pureprofile’s online survey community. Pureprofile. https://www.pureprofile.com/. Accessed 3 Jun 2025. Philpott LF, Savage E, FitzGerald S, Leahy-Warren P. Anxiety in fathers in the perinatal period: A systematic review. Midwifery. 2019;76:54–101. Dennis C-L, Falah-Hassani K, Shiri R. Prevalence of antenatal and postnatal anxiety: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry. 2017;210:315–23. Gorczynski P Paul, and Fasoli P Fabio. Loneliness in sexual minority and heterosexual individuals: A comparative meta-analysis. J Gay Lesbian Ment Health. 2022;26:112–29. Antoniou E, Stamoulou P, Tzanoulinou M-D, Orovou E. Perinatal Mental Health; The Role and the Effect of the Partner: A Systematic Review. Healthcare. 2021;9:1572. NEW 2023 Perinatal Mental Health Guideline. COPE. https://www.cope.org.au/health-professionals/review-of-new-perinatal-mental-health-guidelines/. Accessed 14 Apr 2025. Antony MM, Bieling PJ, Cox BJ, Enns MW, Swinson RP. Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychol Assess. 1998;10:176–81. Russell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): reliability, validity, and factor structure. J Pers Assess. 1996;66:20–40. Recommended national indicators of loneliness - Office for National Statistics. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/compendium/nationalmeasurementofloneliness/2018/recommendednationalindicatorsofloneliness. Accessed 18 Mar 2025. Kotwal AA, Cenzer IS, Waite LJ, Smith AK, Perissinotto CM, Hawkley LC. A single question assessment of loneliness in older adults during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A nationally‐representative study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022;70:1342–5. Shiovitz-Ezra S, Ayalon L. Use of Direct Versus Indirect Approaches to Measure Loneliness in Later Life. Res Aging. 2012;34:572–91. Kosugi K, Nishiguchi Y, Miura T, Fujisawa D, Kawaguchi T, Izumi K, et al. Association Between Loneliness and the Frequency of Using Online Peer Support Groups Among Cancer Patients With Minor Children: A Cross-Sectional Web-Based Study. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2021;61:955–62. Royston P, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W. Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. Stat Med. 2006;25:127–41. Cacioppo JT, Cacioppo S. The growing problem of loneliness. Lancet Lond Engl. 2018;391:426. Steed L, Boldy D, Grenade L, Iredell H. The demographics of loneliness among older people in Perth, Western Australia. Australas J Ageing. 2007;26:81–6. Vasan S, Lambert E, Eikelis N, Lim MH. Impact of loneliness on health-related factors in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective study. Health Soc Care Community. 2022;30:e5293–304. Barton J, Osuagwu UL, Cockrell-Reed K, Vines R. Factors associated with loneliness in rural Australia: A web-based cross-sectional survey. Soc Sci Humanit Open. 2024;10:101154. Franssen T, Stijnen M, Hamers F, Schneider F. Age differences in demographic, social and health-related factors associated with loneliness across the adult life span (19–65 years): a cross-sectional study in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2020;20:1118. Barreto M, Doyle DM, Maes M. Researching gender and loneliness differently. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2025;1544:55–64. Bandyopadhyay M, Small R, Watson LF, Brown S. Life with a new baby: how do immigrant and Australian-born women’s experiences compare? Aust N Z J Public Health. 2010;34:412–21. Naughton-Doe R, Nowland R, Tierney S, Webber M, Wittkowski A. Interventions that prevent or reduce perinatal loneliness and its proximal determinants: a restricted scoping review. BMC Public Health. 2025;25:495. Employment patterns and trends for families with children. https://aifs.gov.au/research/research-reports/employment-patterns-and-trends-families-children. Accessed 16 Jun 2025. Lindberg MH, Chen G, Olsen JA, Abelsen B. Combining education and income into a socioeconomic position score for use in studies of health inequalities. BMC Public Health. 2022;22:969. Organization WH. Guide for integration of perinatal mental health in maternal and child health services. World Health Organization; 2022. Fairbrother N, Young AH, Janssen P, Antony MM, Tucker E. Depression and anxiety during the perinatal period. BMC Psychiatry. 2015;15:206. Leach LS, Poyser C, Cooklin AR, Giallo R. Prevalence and course of anxiety disorders (and symptom levels) in men across the perinatal period: A systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:675–86. Chauhan A, Potdar J. Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy: A Critical Review. Cureus. 14:e30656. Caperton W, Butler M, Kaiser D, Connelly J, Knox S. Stay-at-home fathers, depression, and help-seeking: A consensual qualitative research study. Psychol Men Masculinities. 2020;21:235–50. Darwin Z, Galdas P, Hinchliff S, Littlewood E, McMillan D, McGowan L, et al. Fathers’ views and experiences of their own mental health during pregnancy and the first postnatal year: a qualitative interview study of men participating in the UK Born and Bred in Yorkshire (BaBY) cohort. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017;17:45. Zimet GD, Dahlem ,Nancy W., Zimet ,Sara G., and Farley GK. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess. 1988;52:30–41. Ko SY, Wei M, Rivas J, Tucker JR. Reliability and Validity of Scores on a Measure of Stigma of Loneliness. Couns Psychol. 2022;50:96–122. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files ParentalLonelinessSurvey.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviews received at journal 14 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 08 Aug, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 01 Aug, 2025 Editor invited by journal 08 Jul, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 01 Jul, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 01 Jul, 2025 First submitted to journal 01 Jul, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7017365","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":496069058,"identity":"8ced91b7-0421-4823-b053-119034546f51","order_by":0,"name":"Huiyi Liang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Monash University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Huiyi","middleName":"","lastName":"Liang","suffix":""},{"id":496069059,"identity":"c255eca4-97a5-445b-ac40-4c7da9c5d2ca","order_by":1,"name":"Eleisha Casañas","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Friends For Good","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Eleisha","middleName":"","lastName":"Casañas","suffix":""},{"id":496069060,"identity":"4ce00984-7611-4b32-96a1-af3afeb5e0e7","order_by":2,"name":"Liam Kay","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Monash University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Liam","middleName":"","lastName":"Kay","suffix":""},{"id":496069061,"identity":"2c3578b7-1481-4005-bd1c-c96a3db6859c","order_by":3,"name":"Kate Rasheed","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Friends For Good","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kate","middleName":"","lastName":"Rasheed","suffix":""},{"id":496069062,"identity":"4ef6de4a-d714-4bfd-a1f7-debe8b2298a8","order_by":4,"name":"Alexandra George","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Friends For Good","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Alexandra","middleName":"","lastName":"George","suffix":""},{"id":496069063,"identity":"ef4ea154-6a5d-4a0d-b83e-9c9ee6a561fd","order_by":5,"name":"Melissa Chrys","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Friends For Good","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Melissa","middleName":"","lastName":"Chrys","suffix":""},{"id":496069064,"identity":"0121c3fe-6d89-4c93-8714-19acfac4b0da","order_by":6,"name":"Roisin McNaney","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Melbourne","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Roisin","middleName":"","lastName":"McNaney","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-01 07:38:30","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7017365/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7017365/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":88414626,"identity":"d23b3bc6-fe60-4eeb-8d26-d4553e0430bc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-06 08:48:52","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":107908,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReceiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for determining the optimal cut-off point for the UCLA-LS loneliness scale in relation to the single-item question\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7017365/v1/ff5ab66e093dbd93c20755f5.png"},{"id":88414650,"identity":"3aeab90b-a827-40e9-a568-840ef442bd61","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-06 08:48:57","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1352068,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7017365/v1/2358cc41-2770-47a5-9298-2b5b93f89c1d.pdf"},{"id":88414618,"identity":"a7ec129b-5457-4f8a-a519-577beb71c568","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-06 08:48:51","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":2953371,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ParentalLonelinessSurvey.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7017365/v1/d533c5078d7c87483d30c745.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Loneliness among parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods: a cross-sectional study in Australia","fulltext":[{"header":"Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eLoneliness is a negative emotional experience that arises from a gap between the social relationships one desires and those one actually has [1]. This feeling can be transient, coming and going throughout life, or chronic, persisting over time [2]. Research indicates that life transitions, especially those involving changes in social identity and networks, can heighten the risk of transient loneliness [3]. If unaddressed, this can evolve into chronic loneliness, adversely affecting physical and mental health and overall well-being [4, 5]. In recent years, loneliness has been described as one of the most pressing public health priorities [5], with 9% - 15% of Australians reporting severe loneliness (lonely often or always) [6, 7].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResearch on loneliness has focused mostly on adolescents and older individuals [8, 9]. However, becoming a parent is widely recognized as a major life event that involves shifts in identity, routines, and social networks [10], suggesting that new parents face heightened vulnerability to loneliness experiences. One recent review reported that the prevalence of loneliness among parents ranges from 32 to 100% [11]. Within the perinatal period (i.e. during pregnancy and the first year following childbirth), research has highlighted the key drivers of parental loneliness to include difficulties in adjusting to parenthood, stigma around discussing struggles, being cut off from social support, and interpersonal isolation [12, 13]. Importantly, loneliness in the perinatal period may contribute to the development of mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety [14]. Moreover, Buecker et al. (2020) [15] demonstrated that loneliness experienced in the first year of parenthood could persist into later stages of parenting, underscoring the importance of addressing loneliness beyond the initial transition. Similarly, one previous longitudinal study examined both mothers\u0026rsquo; and fathers\u0026rsquo; loneliness from pregnancy through early childhood in Finland, demonstrating that although overall loneliness levels remained relatively stable, parents followed distinct trajectories that corresponded to different levels of marital dissatisfaction, social phobia, and depressive symptoms [16]. Despite these concerning findings, the prevalence of loneliness among parents across perinatal and early parenting periods in Australia remains unclear.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMost studies on parental loneliness have focused on specific cohorts of parents, such as first-time parents, immigrant or ethnic minority parents, and parents with mental health issues [1, 12, 17\u0026ndash;19]. In studies that have examined loneliness among parents more broadly, many have used qualitative methods [1, 20]. For example, a thematic analysis of UK parent-authored blogs revealed pervasive feelings of disconnection, identity loss, and unmet social needs among parents experiencing loneliness [21]. However, few studies have utilized validated measurement instruments to systematically examine loneliness prevalence among parents during these critical transition periods [22]. A scoping review noted that loneliness in parents is rarely studied as a primary outcome, with most research exploring it as a secondary issue or outcome [11]. As a result, current understanding of parental loneliness is often contextualized within other challenges rather than examined as a primary concern, and there remains a lack of research investigating contributing factors among the general parenting population using high-quality, representative datasets.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEstablishing a clear understanding of the experiences of loneliness and identifying the parents who are at increased risk are critical steps for guiding effective support strategies and informing future research. This study therefore aimed to examine loneliness among Australian parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods using a cross-sectional survey.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003ch2\u003eStudy design\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study employed a cross-sectional design, utilizing an anonymous online survey to collect data. The survey was developed by Friends for Good [23], a national not-for-profit organization in Australia focused on loneliness prevention, and researchers at Monash University and University of Melbourne. The research team collaborated with Nature (a strategic insights company) [24], and PureProfile (an online survey community) [25] to capture the data during January 2025. The study received ethics approval from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval No. 45562).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInclusion criteria for survey participation required respondents to be Australian citizens or permanent residents who were currently pregnant, partners of pregnant individuals, or parents of children aged four years or younger. A total of 907 individuals completed the questionnaire. During data preparation, 33 participants were excluded due to biologically impossible responses (specifically, male respondents indicating pregnancy or childbirth). The final analytical sample comprised 874 parents.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eMeasures\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo examine associations between demographic, psychosocial, and health-related factors and loneliness across different parenting stages, participants were classified into two groups based on the parenting stage. Perinatal parents included those who were currently pregnant, partners of pregnant individuals, or parents with children under one year of age. Early childhood parents comprised those with all children aged between one and four years. Independent variables were organized into two primary categories: demographic factors and psychosocial factors. The primary outcome variable was loneliness. Perinatal mental health screening was conducted to assess relevant psychological factors among perinatal parents, given that the perinatal period is widely recognized as a time of increased mental health risk [26, 27].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDemographic factors\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn the basis of previous research linking demographic factors to loneliness, we assessed a range of variables expected to influence loneliness [10, 11, 28]. Basic demographic variables included \u003cem\u003eage, sex, sexual orientation, relationship status, residential region, education level, and employment status\u003c/em\u003e. Relationship status was categorized as \u0026quot;in a relationship\u0026quot; (including those living together or separately) or \u0026quot;single.\u0026quot; The residential region was coded as \u0026quot;metropolitan\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;regional/rural\u0026quot; based on postcode data. The highest level of education completed was classified into three categories: university degree (undergraduate and postgraduate), high school degree or lower, and trade certificate or diploma. Employment status was organized into three groups: having paid employment (including full-time and part-time or casual positions), full-time caring duties (including parenting), and not having paid employment (including individuals who were volunteering, studying, receiving disability support, or retired). For employed respondents, work arrangements were further classified as work from home, work from office or in-person, or hybrid arrangements combining both locations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo demographic indicators assessed economic status. First,\u003cem\u003e household income \u003c/em\u003ewas recorded into five levels: (1) \u0026ge;$150,000, (2) $130,000\u0026ndash;$149,000, (3) $90,000\u0026ndash;$129,999, (4) $50,000\u0026ndash;$89,999, and (5) $0\u0026ndash;$49,999. Second, self‐described \u003cem\u003eeconomic status \u003c/em\u003ewas recoded into two categories: \u0026lsquo;having difficulties\u0026rsquo; (responses including \u0026ldquo;I really can\u0026rsquo;t make ends meet\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I just about get by with the income I have now\u0026rdquo;) and \u0026lsquo;not having difficulties\u0026rsquo; (responses including \u0026ldquo;I have enough to get along and even a little extra\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I can buy pretty much anything I want with the money I have\u0026rdquo;).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCountry of birth and language spoken at home served as proxy indicators of migrant status. Country of birth\u003c/em\u003e was coded as \u0026quot;Australia\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;Non-Australia\u0026quot; based on a comprehensive list of countries including Australia, England, New Zealand, India, Italy, Vietnam, Philippines, China, and others. \u003cem\u003eLanguage spoken at home \u003c/em\u003ewas categorized as \u0026quot;English\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;other.\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll survey items included an option for respondents to select \u0026quot;Prefer not to say.\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePsychosocial Factors\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe psychosocial factors included \u003cem\u003eperceived social connection, partner support and stigma related to loneliness\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003ePerceived social connection\u003c/em\u003e was assessed via a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree, strongly agree) with two items: \u0026quot;I am satisfied with the level of social connection I have\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;There are barriers for me to be able to engage with friends, family, and neighbors.\u0026quot; Additionally, one item developed specifically for this survey measured perceived partner support [29], \u0026ldquo;I have a supportive partner\u0026rdquo;. Perceived stigma was captured using two items from a previously administered loneliness survey in Australia [7]. These items were scored on a five-point Likert scale and included perceived community stigma toward loneliness (\u0026quot;People often feel ashamed or embarrassed to tell others if they are feeling lonely\u0026quot;) and personal stigma representing individuals\u0026apos; own attitudes toward loneliness (\u0026quot;I would feel embarrassed or ashamed to tell others I was feeling lonely\u0026quot;).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePerinatal Mental Health Screening\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn accordance with the National Perinatal Mental Health Guideline [30], the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21) [31] was administered exclusively to perinatal parents to explore the relationship between perinatal mental health status and loneliness. This 21-item scale includes three subscales measuring depression, anxiety, and stress, with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms. In the present study, Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u0026alpha; coefficient was .96.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLoneliness \u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLoneliness was measured using both the UCLA Loneliness Scale Version 3 (UCLA-LS) [32] and a single-item measure recommended by the Office for National Statistics [33]. The UCLA-LS is a 20-item self-report measure in which participants rate each item on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 4 (Often) [32]. Total scores range from 20 to 80, with higher scores reflecting greater degrees of loneliness. The internal consistency of the UCLA-LS in the present study was good (\u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87). The single-item measurement of loneliness (\u0026quot;How often do you feel lonely?\u0026quot;) was used as an adjunct measure, with response options including often/always, some of the time, occasionally, hardly ever, and never [34, 35].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eData analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSince a clinical cut-off point has not yet been established for the UCLA-LS scale, significant variation exists in UCLA-LS scoring thresholds used in prior research, depending on the population studied. For example, one study classified parents with cancer as lonely when scoring above the sample median of 45 [36], whereas another applied a fixed cutoff score of 40 for university students [4]. To address potential interpretation challenges, we employed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to identify the optimal cut-off score on the UCLA-LS for dichotomizing loneliness, validated against the single-item measure [34, 35]. Responses of \u0026quot;often/always\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;some of the time\u0026quot; on the single-item measure were categorized as indicating loneliness, aligning with prior research [34]. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve were calculated to determine the optimal UCLA-LS cut-off for classifying loneliness. Cohen\u0026rsquo;s kappa (\u0026kappa;) was used to quantify the agreement between the measures. Loneliness was retained as a continuous variable in subsequent analyses to maximize statistical power and preserve response variability [37].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDemographic characteristics, parental groups, and UCLA-LS scores were summarized using means with standard deviations (SD) for continuous variables and frequencies with percentages for categorical variables. A two-step analytical approach was employed to identify multivariate correlates of loneliness. First, bivariate analyses were conducted using independent samples t-tests or one-way ANOVA to compare mean loneliness scores across groups defined by categorical variables, while Pearson\u0026apos;s or Spearman\u0026apos;s correlation coefficients assessed associations between loneliness and continuous or ordinal variables. The data with \u0026ldquo;prefer not to say\u0026rdquo; resulted from single items that were excluded from analysis. Second, variables showing significant associations (p \u0026lt; 0.05) in bivariate analyses were entered into hierarchical linear regression models. Separate hierarchical regression models were constructed for perinatal and early childhood parents to account for differences in parenting contexts. For both groups, Model 1 adjusted for demographic characteristics, Model 2 added psychosocial factor variables to test their associations with loneliness while adjusting for demographic effects. For perinatal parents, model 3 included mental health indicators to assess their additional contribution while adjusting for demographic and psychosocial factors.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003ch2\u003eReceiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eROC analysis demonstrated strong concordance between the UCLA-LS and the single-item loneliness measure (AUC = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.79\u0026ndash;0.87, Figure 1). The optimal UCLA-LS cutoff score of 47 or higher maximized sensitivity (90%) and specificity (59%), with a Youden\u0026apos;s J statistic of 0.49. Cohen\u0026apos;s kappa indicated moderate agreement between the two measures (\u0026kappa; = 0.48, p \u0026lt; 0.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eDescriptive analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eParticipant characteristics\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study included 874 Australian parents with a mean age of 34.47 years (SD = 6.20). A total of 605 participants (69.7%) were perinatal parents (pregnant or with children under one year), and 269 participants (30.3%) were early childhood parents (children aged one to four years). All demographic characteristics are detailed in Table 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1 Demographics and descriptive characteristics of participants and their test results\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"641\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 254px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRelationship with Loneliness score\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCount (%) or Mean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Loneliness Score (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffect size\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParenting Stage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePerinatal Parents (expectant and children \u0026lt;1 year)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e605 (69.7%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.04 (9.51)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEarly Childhood Parents (children 1\u0026ndash;4 years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e269 (30.3%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.96 (10.98)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.47 (6.20)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSex\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.047\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e607 (70.3%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.88 (10.01)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e256 (29.7%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.42 (9.72)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSexual Orientation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeterosexual\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e794 (92.5%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.25 (9.93)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNon-heterosexual\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64 (7.5%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.0 (9.11)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelationship Status\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn a relationship\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e790 (92.4%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.23 (9.90)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSingle\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65 (7.6%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.72 (9.78)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegion\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMetro\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e645 (73.8%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.75 (10.01)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegional/rural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e229 (26.2%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49.94 (9.78)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEducation Level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e542 (62.8%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.10 (9.78)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTrade certificate or diploma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e202 (23.4%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.33 (9.78)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh School or lower\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e119 (13.8%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.39 (9.90)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEmployment Status\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHaving a paid job\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e727 (83.8%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.84 (9.68)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFull time caring duties\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e108 (12.4%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49.90 (11.16)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003enot having a paid job\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33 (3.8%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.52 (10.47)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWork Arrangement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWork from an office/ in-person\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e388 (53.8%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.28 (9.98)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHybrid (both work from home and in an office)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e252 (35.0%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.27 (9.48)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWork from home\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e81 (11.2%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.59 (8.92)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOthers (not employed)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e155\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHousehold Income\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e$150,000+\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e269 (32.6%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.72 (9.95)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e$130,000-$149,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e146 (17.7%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.97 (10.63)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e$90,000-$129,999\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e208 (25.2%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49.85 (8.78)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e$50,000-$89,999\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e155 (18.8%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.14 (9.38)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e$0-$49,999\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47 (5.7%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.81 (10.88)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEconomic Situation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 398px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Original question: \u0026quot;How would you describe your economic situation?\u0026quot;)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSome/many difficulties\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e468 (53.5%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.62 (9.31)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo difficulties\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e406 (46.5%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.68 (10.11)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCountry of Birth\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAustralia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e714 (82.5%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.41 (10.03)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNon-Australia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e151 (17.5%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.40 (9.78)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLanguage at Home\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnglish\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e822 (95.0%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.41 (10.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOther languages (e.g. Mandarin, Hindi, etc.)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43 (5.0%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.09 (9.34)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePrefer not to say\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 106px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen\u0026apos;s d for t-tests, eta-squared (\u0026eta;\u0026sup2;) for ANOVA, and Pearson\u0026rsquo;s or Spearman\u0026rsquo;s correlation coefficient for correlation analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e***\u0026thinsp;= p-value \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, **\u0026thinsp;= p-value \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01, \u0026nbsp;* = p-value \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLoneliness Prevalence\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor the single-item measurement of loneliness, 10.6% of parents reported feeling lonely often or always, and 35.8% reported feeling lonely some of the time. The mean UCLA-LS score was 48.32 (SD = 9.99, median = 50.0, interquartile range = 42\u0026ndash;55, range = 21\u0026ndash;78). Using the UCLA-LS cutoff score identified through ROC analysis, 63.7% of participants were classified as experiencing high levels of loneliness with scores of 47 or higher, while 36.3% were classified as experiencing low levels of loneliness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eBivariate analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLoneliness and demographic variables\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAssociations between loneliness and demographic factors were examined as presented in Table 1. Sex and sexual orientation were significantly associated with loneliness, with males and heterosexual individuals reporting lower loneliness levels. Individuals residing in rural or regional areas reported greater levels of loneliness compared to those in metropolitan regions (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = 2.86, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.004). Similarly, single participants exhibited greater levels of loneliness than those in relationships (\u003cem\u003et\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= \u0026minus;2.74, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.006). However, country of birth and language spoken at home were not significantly associated with loneliness \u003cem\u003e(p \u0026gt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEducation level emerged as a significant factor (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e = 14.23, p \u0026lt; 0.001). Participants with university education reported significantly lower loneliness scores than those with high school education (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001) and those with trade certificates or diplomas (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). However, no significant difference was observed between the high school and trade certificate or diploma groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026gt; 0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEconomic situation demonstrated strong associations with loneliness. Participants who reported experiencing economic difficulties had significantly higher loneliness scores (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = 7.47, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). Household income was negatively associated with loneliness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmployment status was significantly associated with loneliness (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e = 5.16, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.006). Post hoc comparisons indicated that participants without paid employment reported significantly greater loneliness than those with paid jobs (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.02). However, no statistically significant differences were found between full-time caring duties and other employment groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026gt; 0.05). Additionally, no significant differences were observed across work arrangements among those with paid jobs (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026gt; 0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePsychosocial factors and loneliness\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSpearman correlation analyses revealed a significant positive association between loneliness and stigma (\u003cem\u003e\u0026rho;\u003c/em\u003e = 0.36, p \u0026lt; 0.001), and moderate negative associations with social interaction (\u003cem\u003e\u0026rho;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.64, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001) and having a supportive partner (\u003cem\u003e\u0026rho;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;0.41, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePerinatal Mental health and loneliness\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table 2, the DASS-21 was administered to assess mental health symptoms among perinatal parents. Pearson correlation analyses revealed statistically significant moderate to strong positive associations with loneliness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2 Pearson correlations between DASS scores and loneliness scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"473\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 103px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDepression\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.87 (5.16)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 103px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnxiety\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.25 (4.87)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 103px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.43***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 185px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.48 (4.45)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 103px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.51***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. *** p \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eHierarchical Regression Analysis for Loneliness\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePredictors of Loneliness for Perinatal Parents\u0026nbsp;\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll study characteristics were organized into three sets and analyzed through hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Model 1 included nine demographic characteristics: age, residential region, relationship status, education level, employment status, economic situation, household income, sex, and sexual orientation. Model 2 incorporated three psychosocial factors: stigma associated with loneliness, social interaction, and perceived supportive partner. Model 3 included mental health indicators comprising depression, anxiety, and stress.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table 3, demographic predictors in Model 1 explained 9.7% of the variance in loneliness scores (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(11, 544) = 5.32, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; 0.001). Having a university education was a significant negative predictor of loneliness (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;2.45, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.044), while reporting economic difficulties was a significant positive predictor (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = 3.50,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;p\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). After controlling for demographics and introducing psychosocial factors in Model 2, results revealed statistically significant correlations with loneliness, with 53.0% of variability explained (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(14, 541) = 43.52, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). The explanatory variance increased by 43.3%, with stigma serving as a positive predictor (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 1.48, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), while social interaction (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;4.63, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001) and having a supportive partner (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;2.44, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001) were strong negative predictors. After incorporating mental health indicators in Model 3, the total explanatory variance increased to 59.9% (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(17, 538) = 47.32, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), with mental health variables contributing an additional 6.9% of explained variance. Depression (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = 2.08, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001) and stress (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = 0.96, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.037) emerged as statistically significant predictors of loneliness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3 Hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting loneliness among Perinatal Parents \u0026nbsp;(N\u0026thinsp;= 554)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"559\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel 1\u0026beta;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel 2\u0026beta;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel 3\u0026beta;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDemographics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEducation Level (University)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.45*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.39*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEconomic Difficulties\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.51***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.35*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePsychosocial Factors\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSocial Connection\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-4.63***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-3.91***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSupportive Partner\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.44***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.77***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStigma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.48***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.03***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePerinatal Mental Health Indicator\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDepression\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.08***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.97*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdjusted R2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 239px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.32***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.52***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.32***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05; ** P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01; *** P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePredictors of Loneliness for Early Childhood parents\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of hierarchical regression predicting loneliness from demographic characteristics and psychosocial factors are presented in Table 4. Model 1 examined the role of demographic characteristics in predicting loneliness scores. Results indicated that demographic variables accounted for 12.2% of the variance in loneliness scores (\u003cem\u003eR\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = 0.12, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(11, 238) = 2.99,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;p\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). Economic difficulties emerged as a significant positive predictor of loneliness (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = 4.02, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.006), while being male was associated with lower loneliness scores (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;3.47, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.040). After controlling for demographic characteristics, psychosocial variables accounted for a significant 44.4% increase in the model\u0026apos;s predictive value, resulting in a total R\u0026sup2; of 0.57 (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(14, 235) = 21.91, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001). In this model, stigma (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = 2.00, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), social interaction (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;5.92, p \u0026lt; 0.001), and having a supportive partner (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;2.31, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001) all emerged as significant predictors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4 Hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting loneliness among early childhood parents (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;238)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"460\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel 1\u0026beta;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel 2\u0026beta;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDemographics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEconomic Difficulties\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.02**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.72**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSex (Male)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-3.47*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePsychosocial Factors\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSocial Connection\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.92***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSupportive Partner\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.32***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStigma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.00***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdjusted R2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 240px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.99***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.91***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05; ** P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01; *** P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eLoneliness is increasingly recognized as a critical public health concern, yet limited research has applied validated measures to examine its prevalence among parents during critical transition periods [38]. This study addressed this gap by exploring associations between demographic, psychosocial, and health-related factors and loneliness among Australian parents during perinatal and early parenting periods, while examining whether predictors vary across different parenting stages.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings reveal concerning levels of loneliness among perinatal and early childhood parents in Australia. Using a single-item measure (\u0026quot;how often are you lonely?\u0026quot;), 46.4% of Australian parents experienced loneliness (10.6% often/always, 35.8% some of the time), substantially exceeding rates observed in older adults (28-32%) during pre-pandemic to COVID-19 periods in a nationally representative American study [34]. Moreover, the mean UCLA loneliness scale score of 48.32 among parents considerably exceeded scores reported in other population groups, including older Australians (mean = 35.61) [39] and national surveys conducted before (mean = 42.15) and during (mean = 47.15) the COVID-19 pandemic [40]. These elevated scores demonstrate the severity of loneliness experienced by parents and underscore the urgent need for targeted interventions during these critical life stages.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on bivariate analysis results, parents who were younger, female, lived in regional areas, had single relationship status, lower education levels, economic difficulties, lower household income, and unemployment experienced greater loneliness. These findings align with broader loneliness research documenting relationships between demographic factors and loneliness [41, 42]. Notably, the study identified significant disparities based on sexual orientation, with non-heterosexual parents reporting significantly greater loneliness than heterosexual parents, consistent with meta-analytic evidence demonstrating elevated loneliness levels among sexual minorities [28]. This finding likely reflects the additional social challenges and discrimination faced by parents who do not conform to traditional societal expectations regarding family structures and parenting roles [43], representing the first documentation of this disparity specifically within the parent population. Interestingly, the study found no significant associations between loneliness and cultural background indicators, including country of birth and language spoken at home. This finding contrasts with previous research documenting elevated loneliness risks among culturally and linguistically diverse populations [44], suggesting that protective factors may exist within culturally diverse parenting communities in Australia. A particularly important finding was the absence of significant differences in loneliness levels between perinatal and early childhood parents. This consistently high level of loneliness across early parenting stages suggests that loneliness represents an ongoing challenge throughout the early parenting journey rather than a transient adjustment issue confined to immediate postpartum periods. This finding extends previous research that has primarily examined discrete parenting stages and indicates the need for sustained support interventions rather than time-limited programs focused solely on immediate postpartum transitions [1, 45].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe hierarchical regression analyses identified economic difficulties as the strongest predictor of loneliness across both perinatal and early childhood parent groups. This finding aligns with Friends for Good\u0026apos;s research in 2019 [23], which revealed that financial strain serves as a significant barrier to accessing social connection opportunities. Economic strain may limit parents\u0026apos; ability to participate in social activities, access support services, or maintain relationships requiring financial resources (e.g. babysitting costs, travel), thereby compounding feelings of isolation. This finding assumes particular significance given that early parenthood often coincides with reduced earning capacity due to career interruptions and increased financial demands [46]. In the model adjusted for demographic characteristics, psychosocial factors examined in this study demonstrated particularly strong associations with loneliness outcomes. Stigma associated with loneliness emerged as a significant predictor, suggesting that public education campaigns normalizing loneliness experiences during parenthood could serve as valuable primary prevention strategies. Additionally, social interaction levels and partner support demonstrated strong negative associations with loneliness, highlighting the importance of programs fostering peer and community connections for parents. These findings suggest that relationship-focused interventions may be valuable components of comprehensive approaches to reducing parental loneliness [29].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough some factors appeared universal, the results clearly showed that certain predictors of loneliness varied across parenting groups. Therefore, tailored support for parents at different parenting stages is necessary. Among perinatal parents, education level emerged as a significant predictor, with those having higher university education reporting less loneliness. Education often serves as a proxy for broader socioeconomic resources [47]. More highly educated parents may have greater resources for navigating the challenges of new parenthood, including better access to information, stronger professional networks, and enhanced problem-solving skills. Moreover, extensive studies have emphasized that depression and anxiety affect a substantial proportion of parents during the perinatal stage [48\u0026ndash;50]. The current findings extend this concern by revealing a strong association between depressive and stress symptoms and loneliness after accounting for demographic and psychosocial factors. While the cross-sectional design precludes causal interpretation, the bidirectional relationship between loneliness and mental health symptoms suggests that screening for loneliness could help identify those with psychiatric disturbances, and interventions addressing loneliness should be prioritized for those diagnosed with mental health problems.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong early childhood parents, sex emerged as a significant predictor, with females reporting greater loneliness than males. Surprisingly, this significant sex difference was not observed among perinatal parents. The absence of this pattern suggests that the perinatal period may create similar vulnerability to loneliness for both males and females, albeit through different mechanisms. Females often face intense societal expectations to naturally excel in maternal roles, creating pressure and potential loneliness when their lived experiences diverge from these idealized assumptions [12, 28]. Concurrently, biological factors including hormonal fluctuations and physical recovery may further contribute to elevated loneliness levels [51]. Simultaneously, males may assume increased caregiving responsibilities, and the combination of stigma around intensive parenting involvement and limited support resources may create comparable loneliness risks for them [52, 53]. However, this pattern shifts markedly as children transition into early childhood (ages 1-4 years). Females may shoulder disproportionate childcare responsibilities [28], whereas males often return to work and maintain broader social networks, potentially buffering against loneliness. Nevertheless, this finding represents only a partial understanding of the complex relationship between sex and parental loneliness, particularly given that our analysis does not capture the experiences of gender minorities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGiven the multifaceted nature of parental loneliness and its associations with various risk factors, healthcare workers and service providers require specific training to identify and support disadvantaged parents who need additional assistance. The findings from this study emphasize the importance of further research to develop and evaluate interventions that effectively address both universal and specific risk factors for loneliness. For example, universal strategies should focus on reducing economic vulnerabilities through policy initiatives supporting parental leave and childcare assistance, while stage-specific interventions might include integrated mental health and social support programs during the perinatal period, and targeted support for mothers during the early childhood period. This comprehensive approach would create a safety net for some of the most vulnerable members of our community during critical transition periods.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eLimitation\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study has several limitations. First, although we used the widely adopted UCLA-LS, its lack of a standard cutoff makes it difficult to estimate prevalence rates accurately. Although we derived a provisional cutoff (\u0026ge;47), its generalizability requires validation in larger, diverse samples to establish population-specific norms. Second, the cross-sectional design precludes causal interpretations, leaving the directional relationships between predictors (e.g., economic hardship, mental health symptoms) and loneliness unresolved. Future research priorities should include longitudinal studies tracking loneliness trajectories from pregnancy through early childhood to establish temporal relationships and identify critical intervention windows. Third, reliance on self-report measures may introduce response bias, as parents might underreport loneliness due to social desirability concerns or stigma, particularly during what is conventionally perceived as a joyful life stage. Fourth, the narrow assessment of psychosocial factors, which relied on self-developed items to measure stigma and social interaction. Future research would benefit from employing validated and standardized measures, such as the Perceived Social Support Scale [54] and the Stigma of Loneliness Scale [55]. Finally, the overrepresentation of female participants may restrict generalizability to broader Australian parent populations, particularly regarding the experiences of male and gender-diverse individuals.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis cross-sectional study explored demographic, psychosocial, and health-related factors associated with loneliness among Australian parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods. The present study demonstrated that loneliness is pervasive and severe in this population, representing a substantial public health concern. The findings demonstrate that economic difficulties, stigma associated with loneliness, social interaction levels, and supportive partnerships were consistently associated with loneliness across all parenting stages, while other factors exhibited stage-specific associations. Specifically, education level and mental health symptoms were particularly relevant during the perinatal period, while sex differences emerged during early childhood. These differential patterns suggest the need for both universal approaches addressing shared risk factors and targeted interventions addressing stage-specific vulnerabilities. The consistently high levels of loneliness observed across parenting stages underscore the need for sustained support rather than time-limited interventions. Although longitudinal research is required to establish causal relationships between identified factors and loneliness, these findings provide important evidence to inform policy development and clinical practice aimed at reducing parental loneliness during these critical life transitions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthics approval was received from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Project ID 45562). The authors confirm that all methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudy participants received an explanatory statement prior to participation that detailed the benefits and risks of the study, confidentiality, storage of data, and how to withdraw from the study. Once the participants read the explanatory statement, they were able to either take part in the study or withdraw, ensuring informed consent. Informed consent was therefore obtained from all participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo external funding was received for this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAuthors\u0026apos; contributions\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH.L. was the main writer of the manuscript and made substantial contributions to the study design and data analysis. E.C. designed the survey and made contributions to the conception, and wrote the initial draft of the discussion. L.K. assisted with survey development and contributed to literature review. K.R., A.G. and M.C. assisted with survey development and contributed to the interpretation of results. R.M. provided overall supervision and guidance throughout the project. All authors reviewed and commented on the submitted draft, and approved the final version of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe thank all the participants who took part in the online survey. We also express our gratitude to Nature and PureProfile for their support in distributing the survey.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdlington K, Vasquez C, Pearce E, Wilson CA, Nowland R, Taylor BL, et al. \u0026lsquo;Just snap out of it\u0026rsquo; \u0026ndash; the experience of loneliness in women with perinatal depression: a Meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. BMC Psychiatry. 2023;23:110.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArimoto A, Tadaka E. Individual, family, and community factors related to loneliness in mothers raising children less than 3 years of age: a cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21:226.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBasu A, Kim HH, Basaldua R, Choi KW, Charron L, Kelsall N, et al. A cross-national study of factors associated with women\u0026rsquo;s perinatal mental health and wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. PloS One. 2021;16:e0249780.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDoryab A, Villalba DK, Chikersal P, Dutcher JM, Tumminia M, Liu X, et al. Identifying Behavioral Phenotypes of Loneliness and Social Isolation with Passive Sensing: Statistical Analysis, Data Mining and Machine Learning of Smartphone and Fitbit Data. JMIR MHealth UHealth. 2019;7:e13209.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLim MH, Eres R, Vasan S. Understanding loneliness in the twenty-first century: an update on correlates, risk factors, and potential solutions. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2020;55:793\u0026ndash;810.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEnding Loneliness Together (2023). State of the Nation Report -Social Connection in Australia 2023. https:// lonelinessawarenessweek.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/ state-of-nation-social-connection-2023.pdf \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUnveiling A Silent Struggle: Australian-First Research Into The Stigma of Loneliness. Friends For Good. 2023. https://friendsforgood.org.au/assets/downloads/FriendsForGood-ResearchReport-UnveilingASilentStruggle.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBerg-Weger M, Morley JE. Loneliness in Old Age: An Unaddressed Health Problem. J Nutr Health Aging. 2020;24:243\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNicolaisen M, Thorsen K. What Are Friends for? Friendships and Loneliness Over the Lifespan-From 18 to 79 Years. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2017;84:126\u0026ndash;58.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNowland R, Thomson G, McNally L, Smith T, Whittaker K. Experiencing loneliness in parenthood: a scoping review. Perspect Public Health. 2021;141:214.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKent-Marvick J, Simonsen S, Pentecost R, Taylor E, McFarland MM. Loneliness in pregnant and postpartum people and parents of children aged 5 years or younger: a scoping review. Syst Rev. 2022;11:196.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee K, Vasileiou K, Barnett J. \u0026lsquo;Lonely within the mother\u0026rsquo;: An exploratory study of first-time mothers\u0026rsquo; experiences of loneliness. J Health Psychol. 2019;24:1334\u0026ndash;44.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRokach A. Giving life: Loneliness, pregnancy, and motherhood. Soc Behav Personal Int J. 2004;32:691\u0026ndash;702.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNeale A, Wand A. Issues in the evaluation and treatment of anxiety and depression in migrant women in the perinatal period. Australas Psychiatry Bull R Aust N Z Coll Psychiatr. 2013;21:379\u0026ndash;82.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBuecker S, Denissen JJA, Luhmann M. A propensity-score matched study of changes in loneliness surrounding major life events. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2021;121:669\u0026ndash;90.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJunttila N, Ahlqvist-Bj\u0026ouml;rkroth S, Aromaa M, Rautava P, Piha J, R\u0026auml;ih\u0026auml; H. Intercorrelations and developmental pathways of mothers\u0026rsquo; and fathers\u0026rsquo; loneliness during pregnancy, infancy and toddlerhood \u0026ndash; STEPS study. Scand J Psychol. 2015;56:482\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHennegan J, Redshaw M, Kruske S. Another country, another language and a new baby: A quantitative study of the postnatal experiences of migrant women in Australia. Women Birth J Aust Coll Midwives. 2015;28:e124-133.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuoma I, Korhonen ,Marie, Puura ,Kaija, and Salmelin RK. Maternal loneliness: concurrent and longitudinal associations with depressive symptoms and child adjustment. Psychol Health Med. 2019;24:667\u0026ndash;79.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShioda A, Tadaka E, Okochi A. Loneliness and related factors among people with schizophrenia in Japan: a cross-sectional study. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2016;23:399\u0026ndash;408.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcKenna-Plumley PE, Turner ,Rhiannon N., Yang ,Keming, and Groarke JM. Experiences of Loneliness Across the Lifespan: A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis of Qualitative Studies. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-Being. 2023;18:2223868.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNowland R, Thomson G, Cross L, Whittaker K, Gregory P, Charles JM, et al. Exploring blog narratives of parental loneliness: A thematic network analysis. Curr Res Behav Sci. 2023;5:100137.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArimoto A, Tadaka E. Reliability and validity of Japanese versions of the UCLA loneliness scale version 3 for use among mothers with infants and toddlers: a cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2019;19:105.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFriendsForGood. Friends For Good. https://friendsforgood.org.au/what-we-do/research/. Accessed 24 Mar 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNature | Strategic Insights. Nature. https://nature.com.au/. Accessed 3 Jun 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eConnect to Pureprofile\u0026rsquo;s online survey community. Pureprofile. https://www.pureprofile.com/. Accessed 3 Jun 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePhilpott LF, Savage E, FitzGerald S, Leahy-Warren P. Anxiety in fathers in the perinatal period: A systematic review. Midwifery. 2019;76:54\u0026ndash;101.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDennis C-L, Falah-Hassani K, Shiri R. Prevalence of antenatal and postnatal anxiety: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry. 2017;210:315\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGorczynski P Paul, and Fasoli P Fabio. Loneliness in sexual minority and heterosexual individuals: A comparative meta-analysis. J Gay Lesbian Ment Health. 2022;26:112\u0026ndash;29.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAntoniou E, Stamoulou P, Tzanoulinou M-D, Orovou E. Perinatal Mental Health; The Role and the Effect of the Partner: A Systematic Review. Healthcare. 2021;9:1572.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNEW 2023 Perinatal Mental Health Guideline. COPE. https://www.cope.org.au/health-professionals/review-of-new-perinatal-mental-health-guidelines/. Accessed 14 Apr 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAntony MM, Bieling PJ, Cox BJ, Enns MW, Swinson RP. Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychol Assess. 1998;10:176\u0026ndash;81.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRussell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): reliability, validity, and factor structure. J Pers Assess. 1996;66:20\u0026ndash;40.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRecommended national indicators of loneliness - Office for National Statistics. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/compendium/nationalmeasurementofloneliness/2018/recommendednationalindicatorsofloneliness. Accessed 18 Mar 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKotwal AA, Cenzer IS, Waite LJ, Smith AK, Perissinotto CM, Hawkley LC. A single question assessment of loneliness in older adults during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A nationally‐representative study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022;70:1342\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShiovitz-Ezra S, Ayalon L. Use of Direct Versus Indirect Approaches to Measure Loneliness in Later Life. Res Aging. 2012;34:572\u0026ndash;91.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKosugi K, Nishiguchi Y, Miura T, Fujisawa D, Kawaguchi T, Izumi K, et al. Association Between Loneliness and the Frequency of Using Online Peer Support Groups Among Cancer Patients With Minor Children: A Cross-Sectional Web-Based Study. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2021;61:955\u0026ndash;62.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRoyston P, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W. Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. Stat Med. 2006;25:127\u0026ndash;41.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCacioppo JT, Cacioppo S. The growing problem of loneliness. Lancet Lond Engl. 2018;391:426.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSteed L, Boldy D, Grenade L, Iredell H. The demographics of loneliness among older people in Perth, Western Australia. Australas J Ageing. 2007;26:81\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVasan S, Lambert E, Eikelis N, Lim MH. Impact of loneliness on health-related factors in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective study. Health Soc Care Community. 2022;30:e5293\u0026ndash;304.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarton J, Osuagwu UL, Cockrell-Reed K, Vines R. Factors associated with loneliness in rural Australia: A web-based cross-sectional survey. Soc Sci Humanit Open. 2024;10:101154.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFranssen T, Stijnen M, Hamers F, Schneider F. Age differences in demographic, social and health-related factors associated with loneliness across the adult life span (19\u0026ndash;65\u0026thinsp;years): a cross-sectional study in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2020;20:1118.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarreto M, Doyle DM, Maes M. Researching gender and loneliness differently. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2025;1544:55\u0026ndash;64.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBandyopadhyay M, Small R, Watson LF, Brown S. Life with a new baby: how do immigrant and Australian-born women\u0026rsquo;s experiences compare? Aust N Z J Public Health. 2010;34:412\u0026ndash;21.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNaughton-Doe R, Nowland R, Tierney S, Webber M, Wittkowski A. Interventions that prevent or reduce perinatal loneliness and its proximal determinants: a restricted scoping review. BMC Public Health. 2025;25:495.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEmployment patterns and trends for families with children. https://aifs.gov.au/research/research-reports/employment-patterns-and-trends-families-children. Accessed 16 Jun 2025.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLindberg MH, Chen G, Olsen JA, Abelsen B. Combining education and income into a socioeconomic position score for use in studies of health inequalities. BMC Public Health. 2022;22:969.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOrganization WH. Guide for integration of perinatal mental health in maternal and child health services. World Health Organization; 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFairbrother N, Young AH, Janssen P, Antony MM, Tucker E. Depression and anxiety during the perinatal period. BMC Psychiatry. 2015;15:206.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeach LS, Poyser C, Cooklin AR, Giallo R. Prevalence and course of anxiety disorders (and symptom levels) in men across the perinatal period: A systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:675\u0026ndash;86.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChauhan A, Potdar J. Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy: A Critical Review. Cureus. 14:e30656.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCaperton W, Butler M, Kaiser D, Connelly J, Knox S. Stay-at-home fathers, depression, and help-seeking: A consensual qualitative research study. Psychol Men Masculinities. 2020;21:235\u0026ndash;50.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDarwin Z, Galdas P, Hinchliff S, Littlewood E, McMillan D, McGowan L, et al. Fathers\u0026rsquo; views and experiences of their own mental health during pregnancy and the first postnatal year: a qualitative interview study of men participating in the UK Born and Bred in Yorkshire (BaBY) cohort. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017;17:45.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZimet GD, Dahlem ,Nancy W., Zimet ,Sara G., and Farley GK. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess. 1988;52:30\u0026ndash;41.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKo SY, Wei M, Rivas J, Tucker JR. Reliability and Validity of Scores on a Measure of Stigma of Loneliness. Couns Psychol. 2022;50:96\u0026ndash;122.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":true,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Loneliness, Parents, Perinatal period, Early parenting, Demographic factors, Social support, Stigma, Cross-sectional design, Australia ","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7017365/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7017365/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBecoming a parent involves major shifts in identity and social networks that can heighten the risk of loneliness. Although loneliness is increasingly recognised as a significant public health issue, limited studies have systematically examined its prevalence among the general population of parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods using validated instruments. This study addresses this gap by investigating the prevalence and predictors of loneliness among Australian parents during these critical periods using high-quality, representative datasets.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA cross-sectional online survey was conducted in January 2025 with 907 Australian parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods. Loneliness was assessed using the UCLA Loneliness Scale and a validated single-item measure. Hierarchical linear regression analyses were conducted separately for perinatal parents (pregnant or with children under one year) and early childhood parents (children aged one to four years) to examine associations between loneliness and demographic, psychosocial, and mental health variables.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe mean score on the UCLA-LS was 48.32 (which is higher on average than similar studies sampling older adults and people during the COVID pandemic). Greater loneliness was associated with being younger, female, single, residing in regional areas, having lower education and income levels, and not being in paid employment. Across both parenting groups, economic hardship, perceived stigma, limited social interaction, and absence of partner support consistently predicted greater loneliness. Among perinatal parents, lower education and elevated symptoms of depression and stress were significant predictors, while female sex was a key predictor among early childhood parents.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe present study demonstrated that loneliness is pervasive and severe in the perinatal and early parenting periods, representing a substantial public health concern. While economic difficulties, stigma, social disconnection, and lack of partner support were common predictors across both groups, stage-specific differences were also observed. These findings underscore the need for both universal and tailored interventions to reduce parental loneliness, including integrated mental health and social support services. The persistently high levels of loneliness across parenting stages highlight the importance of sustained, rather than time-limited, support strategies. Further longitudinal research is warranted to clarify causal relationships and inform targeted policy and practice.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Loneliness among parents during the perinatal and early parenting periods: a cross-sectional study in Australia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-08-06 08:48:41","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7017365/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-08-14T12:12:30+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"209968321066910830289412400561688982387","date":"2025-08-08T13:02:44+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-08-01T14:47:05+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-08T06:29:30+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-02T00:59:25+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-07-02T00:58:34+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Psychology","date":"2025-07-01T07:36:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"04d6fac7-17f3-42a2-9bf4-8030246a56c7","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 6th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-08-06T08:48:41+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-08-06 08:48:41","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7017365","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7017365","identity":"rs-7017365","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}