CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 113Physical Activity and HealthMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Physical Activity and Depression and Anxiety Disorders: A Systematic Review of Reviews and Assessment of Causality

Open access
Wanjau, Mary Njeri, Möller, Holger, Haigh, Fiona, Milat, Andrew, Hayek, Rema, Lucas, Peta, Veerman, J. Lennert·2023·AJPM Focus
DOI 10.1016/j.focus.2023.100074PMC PMC10546525
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Introduction: Globally, depressive and anxiety disorders are the leading contributors to mental ill health. Physical activity reduces symptoms of depression and anxiety and has been proposed as an adjunct treatment therapy for depression and anxiety. Prospective studies suggest that physical activity may reduce the incidence of depression and anxiety. We conducted a systematic review of reviews with the aim to provide a comprehensive overview of available epidemiologic evidence on the strength of the association between physical activity and incident cases of depression and anxiety and to assess the likelihood of these associations being causal. Methods: We searched Embase and PubMed databases for systematic reviews published between January 1, 2000 and March 19, 2020 that reported findings on the strength of association between physical activity and incidence of depression and anxiety. We updated this search to October 15, 2022. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodologic quality of the included reviews using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews rating scale. We carried out a narrative synthesis of the evidence. We used the Bradford Hill criteria to assess the likelihood of associations being causal. Results: The initial search yielded 770 articles, of which 4 remained for data extraction. Two of the included reviews were scored as high quality, and 2 were scored as low quality. From the 2 included reviews that reported pooled estimates, people with high physical activity levels were found to have a decreased risk of incident depression (adjusted RR=0.83, 95% CI=0.76, 0.90) and reduced odds of developing anxiety (adjusted OR=0.74,95% CI=0.62, 0.88) when compared with those with low physical activity levels. We assessed physical activity to be probably causally related to both depression and anxiety. Discussion: Our evidence is drawn from systematic reviews of observational data. Further high-quality studies, such as randomized control trials, would help to strengthen the evidence base of the associations between physical activity and depression and anxiety. Nonetheless, our findings provide empirical support for the consideration of physical activity in strategies for the prevention of mental ill health.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.focus.2023.100074

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Graphical abstract
Graphical abstract CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram.
Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Covidence Systematic Review Software. Veritas Health Innovation. www.covidence.org.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wanjau, M. N., Möller, H., Haigh, F., Milat, A., Hayek, R., Lucas, P., & Veerman, J. L.
Affiliations
  • Griffith University (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • New South Wales Department of Health (AU)
ORCID
Venue
AJPM Focus
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-06
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
100074
ISSN
2773-0654 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.focus.2023.100074
PMC
PMC10546525
OpenAlex
W4319065961
Cited by
111
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 8
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • AJPM Focus (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Griffith University
  • NSW Ministry of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
physical activity, depression, anxiety disorders, depression incidence, causal inference, Bradford Hill criteria, mental illness prevention, methodological quality of systematic reviews

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review