Do Exercise Interventions Improve Participation in Life Roles in Older Adults? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The World Health Organization recognizes participation in meaningful life roles as a key component of health. However, the evidence base for interventions to improve participation remains inconclusive. In particular, whether exercise interventions improve participation in life roles is unclear. Purpose: The aim of this review was to evaluate the effect of physical exercise interventions on participation in life roles in older adults residing in the community. Data sources: The PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, and PEDro databases were searched from inception through March 2015. Study selection: Randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of an exercise intervention to usual care on participation in life roles in adults who were 60 years of age or older were included in this review. Data extraction: Teams of 2 investigators independently extracted data on participation. Methodological quality was appraised using the Cochrane tool for assessing the risk of bias. The protocol was registered with Prospero (CRD42014014880). Data synthesis: Eighteen randomized controlled trials with a total of 2,315 participants met the inclusion criteria. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effects model. A meta-analysis of 16 studies showed no overall effect of the exercise interventions on participation (SMD = 0.03; 95% CI = -0.10 to 0.16). Subgroup analysis showed that exercise interventions lasting 12 months or more had a small positive effect on participation (SMD = 0.15; 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.28). Limitations: Limitations included variability in definitions and measures of participation. Conclusions: In general, exercise interventions do not improve participation in life roles in older adults. The results do not support the implicit assumption that exercise-based interventions associated with improved function/activity also result in improved participation. Investigation of complex interventions that go beyond exercise to address participation in life roles for older adults is warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".