3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Characteristics of community-based exercise programs for community-dwelling older adults in rural/regional areas: a scoping review

      review-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

          Community-based exercise programs for older adults play a potentially important role in mitigating the decline in functional outcomes, body composition, psychosocial outcomes, and cardiovascular health outcomes that commonly occurs with advancing age. There is a limited understanding of the characteristics and effectiveness of community-based exercise programs, particularly when those programs are offered outside metropolitan areas. Rural/regional settings face unique challenges, such as limited access to equipment/resources, transportation, and services, as well as significant costs to run programs. The objective of this scoping review was to characterise studies in the field that have aimed to implement community-based programs in settings identified as rural / regional. A secondary aim was to establish guidance for future exercise programs in this setting and highlight future research directions. A total of 12 studies were conducted in settings identified as rural/regional areas in various countries across the world were included. Of the included studies, five were randomised controlled trials. The majority of included studies reported on functional outcomes (83%) and psychosocial outcomes (75%), yet only 42% reported body composition, 17% reported cardiovascular health and 17% reported dietary outcomes. Low male representation was observed, with women outnumbering men in 7 of 12 studies. There was also minimal investigation of qualitative outcomes in existing community-based exercise programs in rural/regional settings, presenting a key gap for future research to address. Study Protocol: https://osf.io/txpm3/. Date of registration: 20 July 2020.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40520-022-02079-y.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach

            Background Scoping reviews are a relatively new approach to evidence synthesis and currently there exists little guidance regarding the decision to choose between a systematic review or scoping review approach when synthesising evidence. The purpose of this article is to clearly describe the differences in indications between scoping reviews and systematic reviews and to provide guidance for when a scoping review is (and is not) appropriate. Results Researchers may conduct scoping reviews instead of systematic reviews where the purpose of the review is to identify knowledge gaps, scope a body of literature, clarify concepts or to investigate research conduct. While useful in their own right, scoping reviews may also be helpful precursors to systematic reviews and can be used to confirm the relevance of inclusion criteria and potential questions. Conclusions Scoping reviews are a useful tool in the ever increasing arsenal of evidence synthesis approaches. Although conducted for different purposes compared to systematic reviews, scoping reviews still require rigorous and transparent methods in their conduct to ensure that the results are trustworthy. Our hope is that with clear guidance available regarding whether to conduct a scoping review or a systematic review, there will be less scoping reviews being performed for inappropriate indications better served by a systematic review, and vice-versa.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Health benefits of physical activity: a systematic review of current systematic reviews.

              The health benefits of physical activity and exercise are clear; virtually everyone can benefit from becoming more physically active. Most international guidelines recommend a goal of 150 min/week of moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity. Many agencies have translated these recommendations to indicate that this volume of activity is the minimum required for health benefits. However, recent evidence has challenged this threshold-centered messaging as it may not be evidence-based and may create an unnecessary barrier to those who might benefit greatly from simply becoming more active. This systematic review evaluates recent systematic reviews that have examined the relationship between physical activity and health status.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                s.fien@cqu.edu.au
                Journal
                Aging Clin Exp Res
                Aging Clin Exp Res
                Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                1594-0667
                1720-8319
                12 February 2022
                12 February 2022
                : 1-18
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.1023.0, ISNI 0000 0001 2193 0854, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, , Central Queensland University, ; Mackay, Australia
                [2 ]GRID grid.1034.6, ISNI 0000 0001 1555 3415, School of Health and Behavioural Sciences, , University of the Sunshine Coast, ; Sippy Downs, Australia
                [3 ]GRID grid.1034.6, ISNI 0000 0001 1555 3415, Thompson Institute, , University of the Sunshine Coast, ; Birtinya, Australia
                [4 ]GRID grid.1034.6, ISNI 0000 0001 1555 3415, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine, , University of the Sunshine Coast, ; Sippy Downs, Australia
                [5 ]GRID grid.510757.1, ISNI 0000 0004 7420 1550, Sunshine Coast Health Institute, Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service, ; Birtinya, Australia
                [6 ]Sunshine Coast Council, Birtinya, Australia
                [7 ]GRID grid.1003.2, ISNI 0000 0000 9320 7537, School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, , The University of Queensland, ; Brisbane, Australia
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0181-5458
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1015-1120
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8076-8789
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0965-1013
                Article
                2079
                10.1007/s40520-022-02079-y
                8852913
                35152393
                afcf4105-12b0-4257-9b48-0dc64141f185
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis 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
                : 16 December 2021
                : 17 January 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: University of the Sunshine Coast – Sunshine Coast Council Regional Partnership Agreement Grant
                Funded by: Central Queensland University
                Categories
                Review Article

                older adult,physical function,psychosocial health,regional/rural

                Comments

                Comment on this article