ArticleBMJ open2025
Effects of peer-led or peer-supported physical activity interventions on health outcomes in community-dwelling older adults: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of digital multimodal interventions on objectively measured physical activity in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPhysical activity (PA) has considerable benefits for older adults, yet they often face various barriers that hinder participation. Peer-led or peer-supported PA interventions represent a promising strategy to address barriers, such as cost and lack of motivation. Although existing reviews suggest that these interventions improve PA adherence, combining randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with other study designs may weaken their validity. Furthermore, their effects on PA levels and physical function are inconsistent, and their impacts on cognitive abilities, psychosocial well-being and social support, as well as the influence of peer characteristics and programme design, remain unexamined. This review aims to synthesise evidence regarding the effectiveness of peer-led or peer-supported PA interventions across multiple health outcomes and identify possible influencing factors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The search will encompass six English and three Chinese databases, namely, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Literature, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. It will cover literature from inception to December 2025. Trial registries will be searched, and a manual search of relevant studies will also be conducted. RCTs that focus on community-dwelling older adults participating in peer-led or peer-supported PA interventions will be included. Outcomes include PA levels, physical function, cognitive function, psychosocial well-being, self-efficacy, social support, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and programme adherence. Two reviewers will independently screen the literature, extract data and evaluate the risk of bias by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Meta-analyses will be conducted for outcomes reported in at least two studies, and narrative analyses will be performed for others. Subgroup analyses, metaregression, sensitivity analyses and assessments of publication bias will be conducted as appropriate. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach will be used to assess the certainty of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because only published data will be used. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251112127.
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.