ArticleBMJ open2023
What is the current state of research concerning self-efficacy in exercise behaviour? Protocol for two systematic evidence maps.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Self-efficacy in exercise behaviour in persons with a diagnosed condition: a systematic evidence map.BMJ open · 2026Pooled it
- "Is a general belief in one's capabilities related to mental and physical health?": The relationships between self-efficacy, health outcomes, and health-related behaviour.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Health Behaviors in the Context of Optimism and Self-Efficacy-The Role of Gender Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study in Polish Health Sciences Students.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The effect of exercise self-efficacy on exercise participation among Chinese university students: chain mediation of interest in sport learning and procrastination behavior.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- How grit enhances physical exercise in college students: mediating roles of personal growth initiative and self-efficacy.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionKnowing about a risk factor is not sufficient to ensure corresponding behaviour as additional psychological factors play a role. Self-efficacy is one of the major factors. This also applies to physical activity and exercise behaviour, which is a major public health topic in both primary and secondary prevention. The amount of research on self-efficacy in exercise behaviour is high yet remains uncharted. This protocol presents the research design for two systematic evidence maps on self-efficacy in exercise behaviour in (1) primary prevention and (2) secondary prevention. These maps will thus provide a comprehensive overview over the current state in published empirical research as a starting point for future researchers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The databases Medline (via PubMed) and PsycINFO (via EbscoHost) will be searched using the search terms 'self-efficacy' and any of the search terms 'sport' and 'exercise' in titles and abstracts. All empirical research studies which have measured self-efficacy in relation to exercise behaviour will be included. The primary prevention systematic evidence map will aggregate all studies on healthy humans and the secondary prevention systematic evidence map will include all studies on humans with a pre-existing condition. We will extract and present the data points authors, title, year, sample size (N), age groups, surveyed sport and method of measuring self-efficacy in both systematic evidence maps. Moreover, we will extract and present the target group in the systematic evidence map on primary prevention and the pre-existing condition in the systematic evidence map on secondary prevention. In addition to a data table, we will create freely accessible evidence maps in the form of graphs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since this is a protocol, an ethics approval is not required for the presented and planned work. The results of the two systematic evidence maps will be disseminated via publication in international peer-reviewed journals. In addition, data will be shared in detail via the Open Science Framework platform.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.