Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39045858›Full record

SynthesisJMIR public health and surveillance2024

The Effect of Walking on Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Zijun Xu, Xiaoxiang Zheng, Hanyue Ding, Dexing Zhang, Peter Man-Hin Cheung, Zuyao Yang, King Wa Tam, Weiju Zhou, Dicken Cheong-Chun Chan, Wenyue Wang and 1 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Zijun XuJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0003-1968-9138
Xiaoxiang ZhengJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0009-0002-7513-3900
Hanyue DingJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0001-9977-0985
Dexing ZhangJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0003-0073-4752
Peter Man-Hin CheungJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0001-7671-0437
Zuyao YangJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0003-2386-2431
King Wa TamJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0003-1465-6468
Weiju ZhouJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0001-5077-3202
Dicken Cheong-Chun ChanJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0002-3590-7353
Wenyue WangJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0001-5786-5804
Samuel Yeung-Shan WongJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0003-0934-6385

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Previous literature lacks summative information on the mental health benefits achieved from different forms of walking. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of different forms of walking in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety. Methods: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of walking on depressive and anxiety symptoms. MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, PsycINFO, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched on April 5, 2022. Two authors independently screened the studies and extracted the data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize the data. Results were summarized as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs in forest plots. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results: This review included 75 RCTs with 8636 participants; 68 studies reported depressive symptoms, 39 reported anxiety symptoms, and 32 reported both as the outcomes. One study reported the results for adolescents and was not included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results for adults indicated that walking could significantly reduce depressive symptoms (RCTs: n=44; SMD -0.591, 95% CI -0.778 to -0.403; I2=84.8%; τ2=0.3008; P<.001) and anxiety symptoms (RCTs: n=26; SMD -0.446, 95% CI -0.628 to -0.265; I2=81.1%; τ2=0.1530; P<.001) when compared with the inactive controls. Walking could significantly reduce depressive or anxiety symptoms in most subgroups, including different walking frequency, duration, location (indoor or outdoor), and format (group or individual) subgroups (all P values were <.05). Adult participants who were depressed (RCTs: n=5; SMD -1.863, 95% CI -2.764 to -0.962; I2=86.4%; τ2=0.8929) and those who were not depressed (RCTs: n=39; SMD -0.442, 95% CI -0.604 to -0.280; I2=77.5%; τ2=0.1742) could benefit from walking effects on their depressive symptoms, and participants who were depressed could benefit more (P=.002). In addition, there was no significant difference between walking and active controls in reducing depressive symptoms (RCTs: n=17; SMD -0.126, 95% CI -0.343 to 0.092; I2=58%; τ2=0.1058; P=.26) and anxiety symptoms (14 RCTs, SMD -0.053, 95% CI -0.311 to 0.206, I2=67.7%, τ2=0.1421; P=.69). Conclusions: Various forms of walking can be effective in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety, and the effects of walking are comparable to active controls. Walking can be adopted as an evidence-based intervention for reducing depression and anxiety. More evidence on the effect of low-intensity walking is needed in the future.

Indexed as

AnxietyDepressionWalkingHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicanxietydepressionmeta-analysissystematic reviewwalking

Identifiers

PMID39045858
PMCPMC11287235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.