SynthesisBMJ open2026
Self-efficacy in exercise behaviour in persons with a diagnosed condition: a systematic evidence map.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSelf-efficacy is a major factor in enabling individuals to follow behavioural goals. This applies to health behaviours including physical activity and exercise behaviour, a health topic especially important for persons suffering from health conditions. In subjects with already existing conditions, self-efficacy in exercise behaviour is a research field with a high volume of published articles, yet it has never been charted in its entirety. This systematic evidence map (SEM) provides a comprehensive overview of the current state in published empirical research.
designCollecting, categorising and visualising the breadth of evidence via SEM following the Methods of Evidence Mapping by Schmucker DATA SOURCES: Medline (via PubMed) and PsycINFO (via EbscoHost). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We searched for the terms 'self-efficacy' and any of the search terms 'sport' and 'exercise' in titles and abstracts. We included all empirical research studies published until 2022 that measured self-efficacy in relation to exercise. This SEM includes all studies on humans with a pre-existing condition. We extracted the data points authors, title, year, sample size (N), age groups, pre-existing condition(s), surveyed sport and method of measuring self-efficacy. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We extracted the data points from the full text (if available). In addition to a data table, we created a freely accessible evidence map in the form of graphs in this article.
resultsThe number of publications grew over time from single publications per year in the 1980s to over 100 per year in the beginning of the 2020s, adding up to 1342 included studies. Most research focuses on middle-aged and older adults. Research covers a wide variety of conditions, with endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases (22%) as well as diseases of the circulatory system (19%) being the most common disease groups. Most included studies (71%) do not specify a sport. Most (55%) papers used validated scales to measure self-efficacy, and we discovered 235 individually named scales among them.
conclusionsThis paper offers the first ever comprehensive list of empirical publications on self-efficacy in exercise behaviour in persons with pre-existing conditions in the form of a SEM. The research field was as wide as anticipated concerning total numbers, number of individual scales for measuring self-efficacy, as well as range in diagnosed conditions. Most research focusing on advanced age may be due to many diseases only manifesting later in life, and the lack of specification in types of sport points to the choice of sport being less important than getting enough exercise in general. Future research should examine the strength of evidence and the robustness and comparability of self-efficacy scales as well as underrepresented disease groups for public health considerations. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since no primary data was collected, an ethics approval is not required for the presented work. In addition to the result being disseminated via the publication at hand, the data is being shared in detail via the Open Science Framework platform.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.