MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408197419 · doi:10.3390/healthcare13050575

The Effect of Leisure-Time Exercise on Mental Health Among Adults: A Bibliometric Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2025· review· en· W4408197419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karuppasamy Govindasamy, Masilamani Elayaraja, Abderraouf Ben Abderrahman, Koulla Parpa, Borko Katanić, Urs Granacher

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthRandomized controlled trialLeisure timeGerontologyTime trialPsychologyPhysical activityPhysical therapyMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Adequate levels of leisure-time exercise (LTE) are associated with mental health benefits. Despite increased research in recent years through randomized controlled trials (RCTs), a systematic literature review summarizing these findings is lacking. Here, we examined publication trends, impact, and research gaps regarding LTE’s effects on mental health in the form of a bibliometric analysis. Methods: Five electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Ovid Medline, and the Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched from their inception until 20 November 2024. Citations were independently screened by two authors and included based on pre-determined eligibility criteria. Bibliometric analysis was conducted using SciVal and VOSviewer under five themes: (1) descriptive analysis, (2) network analysis, (3) thematic mapping, (4) co-citation and co-occurrence analysis, and (5) bibliometric coupling. Results: The systematic search identified 5792 citations, of which 78 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Only one study was conducted in a low- or middle-income country. Sixty-four percent of studies were published in quartile-one journals. Most studies were conducted in the United States, followed by Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. National collaborations yielded the highest citation rates, reflecting the influence of cultural and social norms on exercise and mental health. Research gaps were identified with regards to the validity of mental health measures, the paucity of data from low- and middle-income countries, and emerging research sources. Conclusions: This bibliometric analysis highlights the existing evidence on LTE’s impact on mental health and identifies areas for future research and policy. Trials exploring valid mental health outcomes, biomarkers such as mood and oxidative stress, and collaborative research are needed, particularly in underrepresented regions of the world.

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)0.133
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.465
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1330.465
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.019
Bibliometrics0.1640.168
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.389 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207