↓ Skip to main content

Effects of physical exercise interventions in frail older adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
27 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
1241 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of physical exercise interventions in frail older adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12877-015-0155-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carmen de Labra, Christyanne Guimaraes-Pinheiro, Ana Maseda, Trinidad Lorenzo, José C. Millán-Calenti

Abstract

Low physical activity has been shown to be one of the most common components of frailty, and interventions have been considered to prevent or reverse this syndrome. The purpose of this systematic review of randomized, controlled trials is to examine the exercise interventions to manage frailty in older people. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched using specific keywords and Medical Subject Headings for randomized, controlled trials published during the period of 2003-2015, which enrolled frail older adults in an exercise intervention program. Studies where frailty had been defined were included in the review. A narrative synthesis approach was performed to examine the results. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro scale) was used to assess the methodological quality of the selected studies. Of 507 articles, nine papers met the inclusion criteria. Of these, six included multi-component exercise interventions (aerobic and resistance training not coexisting in the intervention), one included physical comprehensive training, and two included exercises based on strength training. All nine of these trials included a control group receiving no treatment, maintaining their habitual lifestyle or using a home-based low level exercise program. Five investigated the effects of exercise on falls, and among them, three found a positive impact of exercise interventions on this parameter. Six trials reported the effects of exercise training on several aspects of mobility, and among them, four showed enhancements in several measurements of this outcome. Three trials focused on the effects of exercise intervention on balance performance, and one demonstrated enhanced balance. Four trials investigated functional ability, and two showed positive results after the intervention. Seven trials investigated the effects of exercise intervention on muscle strength, and five of them reported increases; three trials investigated the effects of exercise training on body composition, finding improvements in this parameter in two of them; finally, one trial investigated the effects of exercise on frailty using Fried's criteria and found an improvement in this measurement. Exercise interventions have demonstrated improvement in different outcome measurements in frail older adults, however, there were large differences between studies with regard to effect sizes. This systematic review suggested that frail older adults seemed to benefit from exercise interventions, although the optimal program remains unclear. More studies of this topic and with frail populations are needed to select the most favorable exercise program.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 1233 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 182 15%
Student > Master 179 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 107 9%
Researcher 91 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 71 6%
Other 245 20%
Unknown 366 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 232 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 222 18%
Sports and Recreations 152 12%
Social Sciences 29 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 2%
Other 144 12%
Unknown 436 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 July 2023.
All research outputs
#701,656
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#87
of 3,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,518
of 401,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#2
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 401,234 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.