Deciphering the role of physical activity in stress management during a global pandemic in older adult populations: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.060 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.008 |
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".