ReviewClinical interventions in aging2026
Movement-Based Interventions in Pre-Frail and Frail Older Adults: An Integrative Review of Clinical, Digital, and Implementation Evidence.
Review in Clinical interventions in aging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Pre-frailty and frailty are dynamic and potentially reversible conditions in older adults, associated with increased risks of disability, hospitalization, and mortality. Evidence supports movement-based interventions as effective strategies to prevent and mitigate these outcomes. Objective: This mini narrative review synthesizes recent scientific evidence on movement-based interventions for pre-frail and frail older adults, with emphasis on clinical outcomes, barriers to implementation, and digital innovations. Methods: A structured and iterative search was conducted using the AI-based Consensus platform, which integrates major biomedical databases. From 1,049 identified records, 281 were screened, 205 assessed in full text, and 36 studies (systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published between 2019 and 2025) met the inclusion criteria. Eligible studies evaluated movement-based interventions reporting outcomes such as strength, mobility, cognition, mood, or quality of life. Results: Multicomponent, resistance, and mind-body exercises consistently improved muscle strength, balance, mobility, executive function, and psychological well-being. Digital strategies, including exergames and mobile applications, showed comparable effectiveness to traditional programs and enhanced accessibility. However, implementation remains constrained by adherence challenges, infrastructural and professional limitations, and the digital divide. Research gaps persist in institutionalized populations, long-term follow-up, and standardized protocols. Conclusion: Movement-based interventions are safe, clinically effective, and scalable strategies to promote healthy aging in frail populations. To maximize their real-world impact, future research should prioritize standardized protocols, pragmatic long-term trials, inclusive recruitment, and equity-focused digital strategies aligned with global healthy aging policies.
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.