Cited by 1,323Physical Activity and HealthAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesCardiac Health and Mental Health

A meta-meta-analysis of the effect of physical activity on depression and anxiety in non-clinical adult populations

Open access
Rebar, Amanda L., Stanton, Robert, Geard, David, Short, Camille, Duncan, Mitch J., Vandelanotte, Corneel·2015·Health Psychology Review

Abstract

Amidst strong efforts to promote the therapeutic benefits of physical activity for reducing depression and anxiety in clinical populations, little focus has been directed towards the mental health benefits of activity for non-clinical populations. The objective of this meta-meta-analysis was to systematically aggregate and quantify high-quality meta-analytic findings of the effects of physical activity on depression and anxiety for non-clinical populations. A systematic search identified eight meta-analytic outcomes of randomised trials that investigated the effects of physical activity on depression or anxiety. The subsequent meta-meta-analyses were based on a total of 92 studies with 4310 participants for the effect of physical activity on depression and 306 study effects with 10,755 participants for the effect of physical activity on anxiety. Physical activity reduced depression by a medium effect [standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.50; 95% CI: -0.93 to -0.06] and anxiety by a small effect (SMD = -0.38; 95% CI: -0.66 to -0.11). Neither effect showed significant heterogeneity across meta-analyses. These findings represent a comprehensive body of high-quality evidence that physical activity reduces depression and anxiety in non-clinical populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17437199.2015.1022901

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 60 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rebar, A. L., Stanton, R., Geard, D., Short, C., Duncan, M. J., & Vandelanotte, C.
Affiliations
  • Central Queensland University (AU)
  • Freemasons Foundation Centre for Men's Health (AU)
Corresponding author
Rebar, Amanda L.
Venue
Health Psychology Review
Published
2015-07-03
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
366-378
ISSN
  • 1743-7199 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-7202
OpenAlex
W2012435631
Cited by
1,323
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 156 · 2025: 146 · 2024: 144 · 2023: 208 · 2022: 130 · 2021: 172 · 2020: 159 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 73 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 7
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Health Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
  • Acquire (CQUniversity) (submittedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Heart Foundation of Australia (Future Leadership Fellowship, ID: 100029)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
physical activity, depression, anxiety, non-clinical population, mental health, exercise intervention, meta-meta-analysis
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Depression, Exercise Therapy, Humans, Mental Health, Exercise, Treatment Outcome

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