MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416922091 · doi:10.1186/s11556-025-00391-w

Effects of transtheoretical model of change-based interventions on physical activity among older adults: a systematic review of randomised controlled and non-randomised controlled trials

2025· review· en· W4416922091 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Review of Aging and Physical Activity · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranstheoretical modelPsychological interventionPhysical activityIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialHealth promotionBehaviour changeAlternative medicinePromotion (chess)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical inactivity in older adults is a major public health concern associated with numerous non-communicable chronic conditions. Several behaviour theories have been advanced to address the issue of physical inactivity including Transtheoretical Model (TTM) of Change among older adults. The study aimed to primarily assess the cumulative effect of TTM-based interventions on physical activity and secondarily on self-efficacy among older adults. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases (including Cochrane Library, AgeLine, Medline, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collections) was searched from inception to August 2024. Inclusion criteria comprised studies investigating TTM-based interventions on PA in individuals aged 60 and above, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration's tool for RCTs while ROBIN-I was used for non-RCTs. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Study findings were narratively synthesised in line with the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis framework. RESULTS: Three studies (two RCTs and one non-RCT) met the inclusion criteria, comprising 1,474 participants (65-89 years; 71% females). TTM interventions showed low certainty of evidence of no significant effects on physical activity or self-efficacy for the RCTs. In contrast, the non-RCT showed very low-certainty evidence for the significant effects of TTM on physical activity among participants in the under-maintenance and maintenance stages, with long-term benefits limited only to those already in the maintenance stage. For self-efficacy, there was very low certainty of evidence for the significant effects of TTM only among participants in the under-maintenance stage. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the limited, inconsistent and low level of evidence of the effects of TTM-based interventions in promoting physical activity among older adults. Whilst for self-efficacy, there is limited, mixed and low to very low level of evidence for the beneficial effects of TTM interventions. More RCTs are needed to identify the most effective components of the TTM and understand the impact of different intervention delivery methods (e.g., digital versus face-to-face) for physical activity promotion in the older adult population.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0360.009
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.317 · 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