Types of Home and Community-Based Physical Activity and Their Effects on the Older Adults’ Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Home and community-based physical activity (HCBPA) has been extensively utilized among older adults. Nevertheless, the varying types of HCBPA, including different duration, intensity, and frequency, have sparked controversy regarding their impact on the quality of life in older adults. This study aims to explore the effects of HCBPA on QoL in older adults. We conducted a systematic review and retrieved studies published from January 2000 to April 2023 from multiple databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and the Web of Science Library). Seventeen articles met the inclusion criteria for this study. Long-term HCBPA interventions may have a more pronounced positive impact on older adults' quality of life than short-term ones, with the intervention's intensity and frequency playing a key role in its effectiveness. The results of the meta-analyses showed significant differences in PCS but not in MCS, both with low certainty of evidence. Policymakers should prioritize the importance of promoting HCBPA interventions with appropriate duration, intensity, and frequency to create a more age-inclusive society.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".