Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41415854›Full record

ArticleJournal of health monitoring2025

Physical activity in Germany: Discrepancy between high societal expectation and actual activity levels in old age.

Nils Henrik Pixa, Eva-Marie Kessler, Lisa Marie Warner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health monitoring, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Nils Henrik PixaMSB Medical School Berlin, Department of Psychology, Berlin, Germany.
Eva-Marie KesslerMSB Medical School Berlin, Department of Psychology, Berlin, Germany.
Lisa Marie WarnerMSB Medical School Berlin, Department of Psychology, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Remaining physically active in later life has been shown to contribute to a longer and healthier life without the need for care or support. Accordingly, a societal expectation to stay active in old age (prescriptive age norm) has emerged - particularly among older adults themselves. Yet, are they in fact as physically active as expected? Methods: Using representative data from the Age_ISM Germany survey (ages 16 - 96 years), we examine the extent to which older individuals agree with the prescriptive age norm that 'old people should normally remain physically active' compared to younger individuals. This is contrasted with the actual activity behavior of 18- to 90-year-olds based on the 2019/2020 GEDA survey data from the Robert Koch Institute. This allows us to compare endorsement of the prescriptive norm with actual behavior. Results: Although the prescriptive age norm of remaining physically active is more strongly endorsed in the older age groups than in the younger age groups, the proportion of individuals who are sufficiently active according to the World Health Organization's definition is significantly lower in the older age groups. Conclusions: The findings point to a 'norm-behavior gap': from around the age of 75 onwards, expectations regarding physical activity and actual behavior diverge increasingly. At the individual level, the negative age stereotype of older people as inactive and passive may, for instance, contribute to older adults' perception of being less addressed by exercise programs. At the socio-structural level, this may indicate a lack of age-sensitive exercise programs.

Indexed as

AgeAge_ISM GermanyEHISGEDAGermanyNorm-behavior gapPhysical activityPrescriptive normSurvey

Identifiers

PMID41415854
PMCPMC12709639

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.