MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109855465 · doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01678-6

Deciphering the role of physical activity in stress management during a global pandemic in older adult populations: a systematic review protocol

2021· review· en· W3109855465 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Churchill, Indira Riadi, Lucy Kervin, Kelly Teo, Theodore D. Cosco

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOMedicinePsychological interventionAnxietyMental healthRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisPandemicIntervention (counseling)Stress managementProtocol (science)MEDLINEClinical psychologyGerontologyPsychiatryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Alternative medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The world has changed dramatically since the beginning of 2020 due to COVID-19. As a result of the pandemic, many older adults are now experiencing an increased and unprecedented amount of psychological stress. Physical activity has been found to be an evidence-based means of combating stress among older adults to promote their quality of life. Studies have demonstrated that those who are physically active experience fewer issues in regard to their mental health, specifically depression and anxiety disorders. Engagement in physical activity may exert a protective influence over stress inducing events and future mental health outcomes. Due to exercise being inexpensive, non-invasive, and effective even via incremental increases in activity level, physical activity interventions should be investigated as a therapy for reducing stress for older adults during the current pandemic. METHODS: Four electronic databases (PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and SportDiscus) will be searched to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluate the effectiveness of physical activity or exercise programs as a psychological stress management tool in adults 50 years of age or older. Only peer-reviewed and published journal articles will be reviewed. Post-intervention psychological stress measures in comparison to baseline stress will be the primary outcome of interest. All studies will be assessed for bias using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. A random effects meta-analysis will be investigated if sufficient evidence of homogenous research exists and the heterogeneity of effect sizes will be tabulated. DISCUSSION: This review will determine the effectiveness of various physical activity interventions for the treatment of psychological stress among the older adult population. This knowledge will help inform care aides, clinicians, family members, and older adults themselves of the most effective physical activity interventions in dealing with stress which is relevant to the ongoing pandemic. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020192546.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.345 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207