SynthesisBMC public health2025
The associations between sedentary behavior and risk of depression: a systematic review and dose response meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Effectiveness of mHealth Interventions Aimed at Promoting Physical Activity and Reducing Sedentary Behavior on Work-Related Outcomes Among Workers: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDepression is a prevalent mental health disorder affecting millions of people worldwide, imposing a significant economic burden on society. Despite the progress in treatment, many individuals with depression still face challenges in accessing appropriate care. Therefore, effectively preventing depression has become an area of focus. The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of sedentary behaviour and varying dose-response relationships on the risk of depression.
methodsA systematic search of relevant studies published up to 15 August 2024 was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. We selected original studies that reported a relationship between sedentary behaviour and the risk of depression. Two authors used pre-filled forms to independently extract the trial characteristics and intervention details. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and a random effects analysis was conducted. Clinical outcomes were assessed according to odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Eight-component Rating scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
resultsTwenty-five studies involving 252,503 participants were included. Compared with participants with less sedentary behaviour, those with more sedentary behaviour had a significantly increased risk of depression (OR 1.35 [95% CI 1.20–1.52], p < 0.001; I2 = 83.3%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, we found that among participants with sedentary behaviour, those aged 16–20 had the highest risk of depression (OR 1.69, p < 0.001), followed by those under the age of 16 (OR 1.43, p < 0.001) and those aged 20–40 (OR 1.05, p = 0.032). In contrast, participants > 40 years showed no significant difference (OR 1.14, p = 0.073). Participants from developed countries had a lower risk of depression than the risk in those from developing countries. Lastly, sedentary behaviour of varying intensities was associated with a higher risk of depression.
conclusionsSedentary behaviour greatly increases the risk of depression. Participants under the age of 20 were at a higher risk of developing depression owing to sedentary behaviour. Appropriate exercise can be effective for preventing depression.
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.