4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Physical exercise and major depressive disorder in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The objective of this study was to assess the benefits and potential risks associated with different physical exercise modalities for managing symptoms in adults with major depressive disorder who were not receiving second-generation antidepressants or cognitive behavioral therapy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted. The search included multiple databases: Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Clinical Trials repository, gray literature, and manual search. No language restrictions were applied. Eligible studies involved RCTs of adults with major depressive disorder who were not on antidepressants or receiving psychological therapy, comparing various exercise modalities with second-generation antidepressants or cognitive behavioral therapy, body-mind exercise, or no exercise interventions. Nine RCTs involving 678 adults were analyzed. The pooled results indicated a small clinical effect favoring exercise in reducing depressive symptoms, although the difference was not statistically significant (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI [− 0.58, 0.04], P = 0.09). Subgroup analyses suggested that intervention duration, frequency, intensity, supervision, age, overweight/obesity status, and diagnosis of depression could influence treatment outcomes. A sensitivity analysis was conducted for studies with controls without exercise interventions and a low risk of bias in the domains related to the randomization process and deviations from the intended interventions. The results showed that there are no statistically significant differences when interventions are compared with medication and body-mind exercise (p = 0.12, I 2 = 78%). Furthermore, the analysis showed a moderate effect size favoring exercise, but no statistically significant difference between groups (p = 0.05), with high heterogeneity (I 2 = 85%). The evidence quality was generally low to very low, and methodological limitations compromised the certainty of the findings. Adverse events associated with exercise were manageable. The study emphasizes the need for well-designed RCTs to provide clearer insights into the potential benefits of exercise in managing major depressive disorder symptoms. Caution is warranted in interpreting these results due to the limitations of the included studies.

          Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022356741.

          Related collections

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

            Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The PHQ-9

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                edison.bedoya@ufv.br
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                14 August 2023
                14 August 2023
                2023
                : 13
                : 13223
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.12799.34, ISNI 0000 0000 8338 6359, Department of Physical Education of the Federal University of Viçosa, ; Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, S/N - Campus Universitário, Viçosa, MG 36570-900 Brazil
                [2 ]GRID grid.412881.6, ISNI 0000 0000 8882 5269, Department of Physical Education of Antioquia University, ; Medellín, Colombia
                [3 ]Department of Physical Education of Llanos University, Villavicencio, Colombia
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1929-9132
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6177-1456
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1164-0639
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4133-1653
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1386-8883
                Article
                39783
                10.1038/s41598-023-39783-2
                10425328
                37580497
                ad6cf4b2-1ae0-4da8-b668-6a5b1fc7670c
                © Springer Nature Limited 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 4 April 2023
                : 31 July 2023
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer Nature Limited 2023

                Uncategorized
                psychology,human behaviour
                Uncategorized
                psychology, human behaviour

                Comments

                Comment on this article