Work

Prevalence and Correlates of Sedentary Behavior Among Older Adults: A Scoping Review of Predominantly Chinese Evidence

Year: 2026

Type: review

Abstract: Purpose: This scoping review aimed to map the prevalence, assessment methods, and correlates of sedentary behavior among older adults, in order to inform clinical nursing practice and identify research gaps. Methods: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and the China Biomedical Literature Database from inception to May 2, 2026. Studies on sedentary behavior among older adults were included, and correlates were synthesized. Results: Twenty-four studies were included. All studies used self-reported measures, comprising 13 types of tools, including the IPAQ and the Teychenne Sedentary Behavior Assessment. Reported prevalence varied widely (23.20%-83.00%), largely reflecting differences in threshold definitions, measurement methods, and populations; when stratified by setting, prevalence was 23.20%-69.80% among community-dwelling older adults and 24.50%-83.00% among hospital- and institution-based populations. The most commonly used threshold was ≥6 h/day (11 studies), with prevalences of 24.50%-72.90%. Correlates were synthesized into six categories within a Social Ecological Model framework: (1) sociodemographic; (2) social support and external environmental; (3) psychological, cognitive, and subjective health; (4) physiological health and physical function; (5) health behavior; and (6) disease- or treatment-context-specific factors. Conclusion: In conclusion, sedentary behavior in older adults is shaped by factors across multiple levels, with the most consistent evidence for physiological and functional factors, general disease burden, psychological and subjective health factors, and health behavior factors; however, these factors should be regarded as correlates rather than causal determinants given the predominance of cross-sectional studies.

Source: Clinical Interventions in Aging

DOI: 10.2147/cia.s638475