MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416069112 · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2025.102934

In-hospital exercise interventions improve inpatients’ frailty and demonstrate promising implementation outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4416069112 on OpenAlexaff
Madeline E. Shivgulam, Haoxuan Liu, Zainab Zafar, Muhammad Arshad Cheema, Shirko Ahmadi, Olga Theou, Myles W. O’Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueAgeing Research Reviews · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de MonctonUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of New BrunswickDalhousie UniversitySaint John Regional HospitalNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMEDLINEInclusion (mineral)Exercise therapyPhysical activityIntervention (counseling)Quality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frail, hospitalized patients are at a greater risk of further health issues. Frailty levels can worsen during hospitalization, with exercise being one of the best strategies to manage frailty. However, there is a lack of synthesized evidence to indicate whether exercise interventions are effective at managing frailty in this unique setting. This systematic review and meta-analysis determined if exercise interventions either preserve or improve frailty levels among inpatients. Sources were searched in May 2024 (updated August 2025) and included Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Academic Search Premier. Studies were included if they conducted an exercise intervention in middle-to-older adult (≥45-years) inpatients and assessed frailty as an outcome using any validated frailty assessment tool. The between-group effect size of change in frailty (Intervention vs. Control) was calculated as the standardized mean difference (SMD) using a random effects model. Five studies including n=810 intervention (age: 82.3±3.5 [range: 79-87.6] years; 45±1% reported females) and 900 control (age: 81.6±4.1 [range: 76.0-87.1] years; 44±1% reported females) participants were included. Improvements in patients’ frailty were observed in n=3/5 studies. The meta-analysis exhibited a favorable effect on frailty between the intervention and control groups (SMD: 0.716, 95%CI: 0.119–1.312) with significant heterogeneity between studies ( I 2 =92%, p <0.001). No differences were observed between interventions using distinct exercise types or frailty assessment tools (both, p >0.196) . Despite limited available evidence, results indicate exercise training interventions may be effective in improving frailty. This supports the inclusion of exercise interventions beyond usual hospital care to improve frailty. • Exercise interventions are a viable and feasible strategy for managing frailty in hospitalized patients. • Aerobic or combined exercise programs are effective at improving frailty assessed via the frailty phenotype or frailty index. • High adherence & retention support intervention efficacy but improving recruitment and eligibility may enhance implementation.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgeing Research ReviewsSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207