SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2025
Non-Pharmacological Interventions Targeting Sense of Coherence Among Older Adults and Adults With Chronic Conditions: A Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurodiversity-affirming SEA for ADHD: evaluation of an online program for parents and children in the ultra-orthodox Jewish community.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- Harnessing psychological resilience in hip fracture recovery: The overlooked role of sense of coherence.World journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Higher Sense of Coherence Is Associated With Lower Frailty Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Mediation Study.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSense of coherence (SoC) is a core concept of 'salutogenesis' in positive psychology, correlated with emotional distress and disease development in adults with chronic disease and older adults. A diversity of non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) has been developed to enhance SoC, but research findings are conflicting and the adequacy of sample sizes is uncertainty.
objectiveThis paper aimed to explore appropriate interventions, evaluate the effectiveness of these SoC interventions and verify the statistical robustness and reliability of pooled results.
methodsSearch terms including 'sense of coherence' and 'randomised controlled trial (RCT)' were performed in nine electronic databases. Publications were written in English from January 1979 to February 2024. A narrative synthesis was performed to determine intervention details, and classical meta-analysis was used to analyse available data on SoC using RevMan. Besides, trial sequential analysis (TSA) was conducted to verify the robustness of pooled effect size.
resultsMeta-analysis was carried out with 27 RCTs involving 2178 patients. It showed significant effects on SoC compared to usual care among this population for all NPIs at post-intervention and 3-month follow-up. Of these follow-up durations, the effective NPIs were salutogenic-based intervention, self-management intervention, while no significant difference was observed at 6-month or > 6-month follow-up. TSA showed that the significant finding of meta-analysis in salutogenic-based intervention was stable and reliable, while the pooled sample size on self-management intervention was insufficient.
conclusionsNon-pharmacological (salutogenic-based) interventions could improve SoC among older adults and adults with chronic conditions within 3 months after-intervention. However, its effects were not sustained over a longer period, which further studies will need larger sample sizes to draw definitive conclusions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This meta-analysis provided the evidence that salutogenic-based interventions could improve SoC among the target population within 3 months after-intervention, providing a solid foundation for healthcare professionals to base their therapeutic strategies. REPORTING
methodThe searching results were reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis checklist. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study is a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis, and the aforementioned details are not applicable to our research.
trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42023401215.
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.