Edited by: Pedro Morouço, Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Portugal
Reviewed by: Dean Johannes Kriellaars, University of Manitoba, Canada; M. Louise Humbert, University of Saskatchewan, Canada
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Population aging is a prominent phenomenon worldwide. The increase in physical inactivity and co-morbid diseases poses a major challenge to current community health policies. Physical activity guidelines recommended for older people have not been met by this population group. For this reason, a new model, physical literacy, is being innovated and has gained global attention and has emerged as an effective and innovative active aging strategy to improve physical activity participation of this vulnerable group. However, the evidence on physical literacy in the older adult so far is brief and diffuse. Therefore, the aim was to conduct a scoping review protocol to identify and map physical literacy in older people. This scoping review protocol was based on the Joanna Briggs Institute Method. The search will be performed on Embase, IBSS ProQuest, Medline OVID, PsycINFO Ebsco, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Social Services Abstracts ProQuest, Sociological Abstracts ProQuest, Web of Science ISI, Wiley Online Library, Cochrane Library, and ERIC Ebsco databases. All types of studies published since 2001 in English, Spanish, and Portuguese examining physical literacy over the lifespan of older adults were included. Two independent reviewers will organize and select studies according to the objectives and questions of the scoping review. The selected publications will be organized and summarized using a checklist proposed by the PRISMA-ScR. Qualitative data analysis (thematic analysis) will be performed to identify meanings and patterns to answer the research question. The final scoping review will present the main evidence available, key concepts/definitions, research conducted, and knowledge gaps related to physical literacy in older adults, leading to strategies to improve the community health of this population, as well as health literacy.
Population aging is a real global challenge for government policies (
In developed countries, the population pyramid is inverted, with more and more older people and fewer children (
Numerous studies have demonstrated the health benefits of physical activity (PA) for older people (
However, the World Health Organization (WHO) PA guideline recommendations are failing because only 12% of the older person is adhering to them, with the older adult population being the most vulnerable (
In this sense, changes are taking place in the new attitudes toward physical inactivity in this population. Thus, physical literacy (PL) has emerged as one of the hot topics in education and public health for its power to promote an active lifestyle and to assess movement in relation to physical activity, quantifying motor skills, context, learning processes, and motivation (
PL was defined in the Bulletin of the International Council of Sport Science and Physical Education of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization as the motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge and understanding to value and participate in a physically active lifestyle (
PL is an emerging concept that integrates different dimensions, which gives it a holistic view of physical development as a promoter of health (
Several projects reflect the growing global awareness of the importance of PL for the health and wellbeing of communities (Sport for Life driven in Canada, in Sweden, IPLA from the United Kingdom and expanded to India, Australia, China, Japan, United States, rest of Europe, etc.). They also demonstrate the commitment of governments, organizations, and health and sport professionals to promote active and healthy lifestyles around the world. Each country tailor’s physical literacy initiatives according to its specific needs, resources, and cultural contexts (
Although PL plays an important role in promoting positive health habits (
There are recent reviews (
This review aimed to be a starting point to stimulate empirical research on PL in the older adult, as characterizing the development of its dimensions will enable the participation of this population in structured and full physical activities, adopting active lifestyles, promoting healthy aging, becoming a valuable tool for improving their quality of life, and maintaining good physical and mental health as they age, thus slowing down the sequelae inherent to the biological process, promoting their autonomy, and delaying the state of old age dependence.
Therefore, the aim was to carry out a scoping review protocol to identify and map PL in older people in different contexts (
This is a scoping review protocol study that will form the starting point for an exploratory project that systematically maps the available literature on the concept of PL in older adults. According to Munn et al. (
The PCC mnemonic is employed to shape a research question by considering the Population, Concept, and Context. This approach aids in pinpointing potential gaps in knowledge, understanding theories, highlighting crucial concepts, measuring specific aspects of interest, and elucidating the practices and evidence related to a particular topic (
P—People in their older adult years.
C—PL.
C—Any context.
It was decided to open the study question on the concept of PL in older adults in a context-independent manner to be able to reach all studies on this topic specifically in this population, which differs from previous studies (
Studies will be assessed for inclusion in the review according to the following criteria:
Study design: We will only include studies that investigate the PL throughout older adult life. This includes primary research (peer-reviewed research articles), evidence synthesis (narrative reviews, systematic reviews, scoping reviews, rapid reviews, etc.), conference abstracts, discussion articles, editorials, and thesis. We will not limit the included studies by the sample size of the study.
Outcomes: We will include studies examining outcomes under the concept of PL, both quantitatively and qualitatively.
Study population and additional characteristics: We will only include studies where the study population meets the MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) “Aged” characteristics: a person 65 years of age or older. We will not limit included studies by their ethnicity, country of origin, economic characteristics, or geographic region. We will limit the studies included by publication date to those published since 2001, since Whitehead’s PL concept was first described in that year (
We will search the information sources such as Embase, IBSS ProQuest, Medline OVID, PsycINFO Ebsco, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Social Services Abstracts ProQuest, Sociological Abstracts ProQuest, Web of Science ISI, Wiley Online Library, Cochrane Library, and ERIC Ebsco. Additional searches of gray literature will include the first 100 results of a Google Scholar search, hand searches, and contact with study authors. The reference list of relevant review papers and included articles were hand searched for additional articles. These searches will be carried out using the information source to which the Extremadura University and the Miguel Hernández University of Elche have access. We will persist in the search process until we have reached a high level of certainty that we have thoroughly considered all relevant studies associated with the review question. We will also search the registries in the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) and the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) to identify planned, ongoing, or recently published reviews.
The specific literature search strategies will be developed after discussion and acceptance by the research team. As recommended in all types of JBI reviews, a three-step search strategy will be applied to reach the greatest number of publications and gray literature. Each step is specified in this section of the protocol.
The first step is an initial limited search of at least two appropriate online databases relevant to the topic. This initial literature search strategy will be developed using keywords and descriptors related to the topic, using in addition in the case of population a Medical Subject Headings (MeSH;
Descriptors used according to the Population, Concept, and Context.
| Mnemonic | Keywords | MeSH |
|---|---|---|
| P (Population) | Aged, older adult, elderly, geriatrics and senior | Aged |
| C (Concept) | Physical literacy and physically literate | - |
| C (Context) | - | - |
A second search should then be conducted using all identified keywords constituting the high-sensitivity search strategy across all sources of information included in
Sources of information and high-sensitivity search strategies.
| Source of information | Search strategy |
|---|---|
| Embase Aged (65+ years) | (‘physical literacy’ OR ‘physically literate’) AND (‘aged’ OR ‘older adults’ OR ‘elderly’ OR ‘geriatrics’ OR ‘seniors’) |
| International Bibliography of the Social Sciences | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| MEDLINE All aged (65 and over)” | ((physical literacy* or physically literate*) and (aged or older adults* or elderly or geriatrics or seniors)) |
| PsycINFO Aged (65 years and older) | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| PubMed Aged: 65+ years | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| ScienceDirect | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| Scopus | TITLE-ABS (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English”) OR LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “Spanish”) OR LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “Portuguese”)) |
| SPORTDiscus | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| Social Services Abstracts | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| Sociological Abstracts | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| Web of Science ISI | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| Wiley Online Library | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
| Cochrane Library | ((“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (“aged” OR “older adults” OR “elderly” OR “geriatrics” OR “seniors”)) |
| ERIC | (“physical literacy” OR “physically literate”) AND (aged OR “older adults” OR elderly OR geriatrics OR seniors) |
Third, the reference list of identified reports and articles should be searched for additional sources. In this third stage, the reference lists of all identified sources or only the reference lists of the sources that were selected from full text and/or included in the review can be examined. If necessary, the corresponding authors will be contacted by e-mail for further information.
To avoid duplicate entries, the research results found through the search are entered into the EndNote software. In the first stage, two independent researchers will carry out the study selection by reviewing the title, abstract, and keywords. If there are uncertainties, they will refer to the full text, excluding studies that do not meet the predetermined eligibility criteria. If there are disagreements or doubts between the two researchers, a third researcher decides. The inclusion of any study might depend on using the critical appraisal tools provided by the JBI beforehand. The research outcomes and the study selection process will be documented in the scoping review, visually depicted through a Prisma Scoping Review® (
Two separate reviewers (C.G.-A. and J.R.-C.) will independently screen articles, conduct the data extraction process (Data charting), and apply JBI critical appraisal tools. This approach aims to minimize errors and biases. This will provide the reader with a comprehensive and coherent summary detailing the specifics and characteristics of the studies, aligning closely with the objectives of the scoping review. An extraction tool in Microsoft Excel® will be employed, following the JBI methodology guidance for scoping reviews (as outlined in
Data extraction tool to describe the details and characteristics of the studies.
| Authors and year of publication | - |
|---|---|
| Country of origin | - |
| Population characteristics and sample size | - |
| Type of material | Peer-reviewed research articles, evidence synthesis, conference abstracts, discussion articles, editorials, and thesis. |
| Study design | Randomized or non-randomized controlled trials, cohort, case–control, cross-sectional, descriptive observational, ecological, or qualitative studies. |
| Theories or framework discussed | Health-promoting physical activity, motor competence, and phenomenological embodiment. |
| Aims/purpose | Description of the main objectives |
| Outcomes and details of these | Measurements related to the multifaceted concept comprised of affective (motivation and confidence), physical (physical competence), cognitive (knowledge and understanding), and behavioral (engagement in physical activities for life) domains |
| Results | - |
| Conclusions and key findings | - |
| Challenges and limitations | - |
Thematic analysis will be utilized for qualitative data analysis to uncover patterns and meanings that address the research question. Additionally, the study type and level of evidence from the study design will be assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist.
The final report will follow the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, utilizing tables, diagrams, and thematic maps to visually represent the synthesized evidence extracted from the data, facilitating a clearer understanding of the results. This phase will involve (1) analyzing the data, (2) presenting results connected to the research inquiries, and (3) interpreting the implications of these findings for further research and practical applications. As a result of interest, we expect to find information based on the conception, measurements, effectiveness, and/or testimonials related to older adults’ physical literacy/ies. A narrative summary will report the relationships between the results and the review objective and question and identify knowledge gaps for future studies (e.g., systematic reviews).
The timeline for the study protocol of scooping review is going to develop in several phases, which are outlined below with the expected completion date for each phase.
Protocol Preparation
The organization of the protocol will be carried out during the month of January 2023.
Database search
The search of the aforementioned databases will be carried out during the months of February and March 2023.
Title and abstract screening
Two independent researchers will carry out the study selection by reviewing the title, abstract, and keywords in March 2023.
Full-text review
The revision of the full text is going to be carried out in April 2023.
Data extraction and analysis
Data extraction as well as data analyses will be performed by the authors in the month of April 2023.
Quality assessment
The quality assessment will be administered using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist during the month of April 2023.
Manuscript preparation and dissemination
Finally, the scooping review is expected to be prepared for dissemination and publication in May of the same year.
The proposed scoping review aims to map and identify the available evidence regarding PL in older people in different contexts.
Delving into the concept of PL in Older Adults can make a difference in the development of active aging in the older population. It will have a positive impact on improving the health and HRQoL of this, ensuring healthy aging and providing the older adult with not only more years of life but also healthier years of life.
Therefore, this scooping review seeks to fill a scientific gap in PL in the older adult, as the reviews that exist so far on this concept, which has evolved as the understanding of physical education and the importance of physical activity have grown throughout the 20th century and continue into the 21st century (
This exploratory review aims to be a key point to enhance research on PL in older people, contributing to scientific production and guiding possible future studies to promote PL as a tool to improve active aging in the older population, enhancing community health literacy from PL. Regarding the findings, they will be articulated in a manuscript and published in a high-impact, open-access, peer-reviewed journal within the scientific community. Any modifications to the protocol will be justified and reported in the final scooping review publication.
CG-A: Conceptualization, Investigation, Project administration, Writing – original draft preparation, Writing – review & editing. JR-R: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft preparation, Writing – review & editing. JR-C: Investigation, Validation. JP: Visualization, Writing – review & editing. CF: Visualization, Writing – review & editing. AC-P: Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. MS: Supervision, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
The contribution of Galán-Arroyo, C. is supported by the Spanish government and the European recovery fund Next Generation EU under Project MS-7 (RD 289/2021 Margarita Salas UEx).
The authors thank the Universidad de Las Américas for their support of the Open Access initiative.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.