MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291954797 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.807140

The efficacy and safety of exercise and physical activity on psychosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4291954797 on OpenAlexafffund
Christina Ziebart, Pavlos Bobos, Joy C. MacDermid, Rochelle Furtado, Daniel J. Sobczak, Michele Doering

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsParkwood InstituteSt. Joseph's HospitalHand and Upper Limb ClinicPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchArthritis Society
KeywordsMedicineAerobic exerciseMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialPsychosisAdverse effectSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Strictly standardized mean differencePhysical therapyMEDLINEPsychiatryPositive and Negative Syndrome ScaleSystematic reviewInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Treatment of psychosis typically focuses on medication, but some of these medications can have unintended side effects, exercise has global health benefits, with minimal side effects. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of exercise and physical activity on psychotic symptoms, in people with psychosis when compared to usual care, in a hospital setting. Methods: A systematic electronic search of the literature was performed in June 2022, in PubMed, Scopus, and PsychINFO with no date restrictions. We included randomized trials (RCTs) with patients with psychosis that received an exercise intervention within a hospital setting. The primary outcome of interest was Positive and Negative Symptom Severity Scale (PANSS) overall score. Secondary outcomes were adverse or serious adverse events. Results: A total of 24 trials were included in this systematic review, with 9 included in the meta-analysis, including 1,426 participants. Aerobic had more pronounced effects when compared to usual care in PANSS positive (-0.23, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.07), negative (-0.38, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.10), general (-0.42, 95% CI -0.71 to -0.13) and overall scores (-0.25, 95% CI -0.52 to 0.03). Yoga when compared to usual care had no difference in PANSS subscale and overall scores. We found no difference on relapsing of psychiatric symptoms or somatic hospitalization when we compared aerobic or yoga to usual care (Risk Ratio, 1.12 95% CI 0.44-2.81). Conclusion: Aerobic activity as an exercise modality in a hospital setting can be effective in decreasing negative and general psychosis symptom severity scores compared to usual care, however, it was uncertain if the effects were clinically important. More trials are needed to confirm the clinically benefit of aerobic exercise. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42021224997].

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.042
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207