Exercise for Healthy Aging in Adults 50 and Older: A Narrative Review of Strength Training, Balance, Tai Chi, Pilates, Flexibility, and Meditation

Ori Scott, M.Sc., Registered Dietitian (Israel) Independent Researcher, New York, NY, USA Healthy Habits Coaching · healthyhabitssimply.com

Abstract

Background: Population ageing and rising physical inactivity in later life have increased interest in exercise as a means of preserving physical function, independence, and mental health. Older adults are commonly advised to combine muscle-strengthening, balance, and mobility activities, and mind–body practices such as tai chi, Pilates, and meditation are widely promoted, yet the strength of evidence differs considerably between these approaches.

Objective: To synthesise recent evidence on six exercise and mind–body modalities — resistance training, balance training, tai chi, Pilates, flexibility training, and meditation — in relation to outcomes relevant to healthy ageing in adults aged 50 years and older, and to distinguish established from indirect and emerging evidence.

Methods: Narrative review of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, large cohort studies, and international guidelines, prioritising publications from 2021 to 2026 while retaining earlier seminal work. Bibliographic details were verified against DOI and publisher records. Formal risk-of-bias assessment and meta-analysis were not performed.

Results: Forty-seven sources were included. The most consistent evidence concerns fall prevention: in community-dwelling older people, exercise reduced the rate of falls by 23% overall and balance and functional exercise by 24% (high-certainty evidence), and tai chi reduced the number of people who fell. Progressive resistance training produced large improvements in muscle strength and meaningful improvements in chair-rise performance and gait speed, and regular muscle-strengthening activity was associated with 10–17% lower risk of all-cause mortality and several chronic diseases in observational studies. Pilates improved balance, strength, and flexibility in pooled analyses, although certainty was low to moderate and effects were smaller against active comparators. Stretching increased range of motion, but evidence that flexibility training alone improves daily function in older adults remains conflicting. Mindfulness-based programmes produced small improvements in cognition and moderate reductions in depressive symptoms, whereas an 18-month meditation trial found no effect on brain structure or perfusion. Evidence for adults aged 50–59 years is largely indirect.

Conclusions: Resistance and balance-focused exercise, including tai chi, have the strongest evidence for supporting physical function and fall prevention in later life. Pilates, flexibility training, and meditation may contribute complementary benefits, but their evidence is less certain. A multicomponent approach consistent with current international guidelines is supported, and larger, longer, and better-controlled trials are needed for the less established modalities.

Keywords: healthy ageing; older adults; resistance training; balance training; falls prevention; tai chi; Pilates; flexibility; meditation; mindfulness

1. Introduction

Physical activity is one of the few modifiable behaviours that influences nearly every dimension of ageing, yet population levels are moving in the wrong direction. A pooled analysis of 507 population-based surveys including 5.7 million participants estimated that 31.3% of adults worldwide were insufficiently active in 2022, compared with 23.4% in 2000, and that insufficient activity increased among people aged 60 years and older in all regions and in both sexes [1]. On current trends, the global target of a 15% relative reduction in inactivity by 2030 is unlikely to be met [1].

The 2020 World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines recommend that adults undertake 150–300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity per week, together with muscle-strengthening activities involving all major muscle groups on at least two days per week [2]. For older adults, the guidelines add varied multicomponent activity that emphasises functional balance and strength training on three or more days per week, with the aims of improving functional capacity and preventing falls [2]. These recommendations reflect the clinical importance of physical capability in later life. Falls are the second leading cause of unintentional injury death worldwide, with an estimated 684,000 deaths each year and 37.3 million falls severe enough to require medical attention; adults older than 60 years experience the greatest number of fatal falls [3].

Simple measures of physical function carry substantial prognostic information. In a pooled analysis of nine cohorts including 34,485 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and older, each 0.1 m/s increment in usual gait speed was associated with a lower hazard of death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87–0.90) [4]. In the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study of 139,691 adults aged 35–70 years in 17 countries, each 5 kg lower grip strength was associated with higher all-cause mortality (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.13–1.20) [5]. These associations do not establish that improving gait speed or grip strength will extend life, but they identify muscle strength and mobility as clinically meaningful targets. Expert consensus guidelines from the International Conference on Frailty and Sarcopenia Research (ICFSR) state that structured exercise improves the hallmarks of frailty and supports cognitive function, and that prescription should be matched to the intended outcome [6].

In practice, adults in midlife and later life encounter a wide range of exercise options. Some, such as progressive resistance training and balance training, have been evaluated in large numbers of randomised trials. Others, including Pilates and meditation, are popular but have a smaller and more heterogeneous evidence base. Recommendations made to the public do not always distinguish between these levels of evidence. In addition, most trials enrol people aged 60 or 65 years and older, so the evidence applicable to adults in their fifties is often extrapolated.

The objective of this narrative review is therefore to synthesise recent evidence on six modalities — resistance training, balance training, tai chi, Pilates, flexibility and mobility training, and meditation — in relation to outcomes that define healthy ageing, including falls, strength and physical function, range of motion, cognition, mental health, and mortality. For each modality, the review distinguishes direct and established evidence from indirect and emerging evidence, and considers how the modalities may be combined in a programme for adults aged 50 years and older.

2. Methods

2.1 Review design

This is a narrative review. A narrative design was chosen because the question spans six heterogeneous interventions, several outcome domains, and different types of evidence, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews and meta-analyses, network meta-analyses, prospective cohort studies, and international guidelines. Integrating these sources requires interpretive synthesis rather than a single pooled estimate.

2.2 Information sources and search concepts

The literature search was completed on 11 October 2026. Structured searches combined terms for each modality ("resistance training", "strength training", "muscle-strengthening", "balance training", "falls", "tai chi", "tai ji quan", "Pilates", "stretching", "flexibility", "range of motion", "mindfulness", "meditation") with population terms ("older adults", "aged", "elderly") and design terms ("systematic review", "meta-analysis", "randomized controlled trial"). Records were identified through bibliographic web searches and publisher, Cochrane Library, PEDro, and institutional repository records. PubMed's search interface could not be queried programmatically during preparation of this review; PubMed-indexed records were therefore identified through these other routes. Reference lists of key reviews and guidelines were also examined, and official guidance from the WHO, the ICFSR, the World Falls Guidelines group, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), and the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA) was included.

2.3 Evidence selection and verification

Priority was given to systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and RCTs published between 2021 and 2026 that enrolled older adults. Earlier publications were retained when they remain the principal source for a question, such as Cochrane reviews, the original Otago trial, and large prognostic cohorts. Bibliographic details (authors, title, journal, year, volume, pages or article number, and DOI) were verified against Crossref DOI records or publisher pages, and records were checked for corrections and retractions. Numerical results were taken from the original abstracts or full texts. One network meta-analysis was excluded because of internal numerical inconsistencies, and a second network meta-analysis was excluded because its reported confidence intervals differed between the abstract and the results.

2.4 Evidence synthesis and limitations of the approach

Findings were organised by modality and outcome and classified as direct and established evidence (the relevant population, intervention, and outcome studied in randomised trials or high-quality syntheses), indirect and supportive evidence (related populations or outcomes, or observational designs), or emerging evidence (small, preliminary, or low-certainty studies). Formal PRISMA-based study selection, duplicate independent screening, protocol registration, quantitative risk-of-bias assessment, certainty-of-evidence grading by the author, and meta-analysis were not performed. Where included reviews reported certainty ratings, these are reported as published.

3. Resistance (strength) training

3.1 Muscle strength and physical function

Progressive resistance training has the largest randomised evidence base of the modalities considered here. The Cochrane review by Liu and Latham included 121 RCTs with 6,700 participants aged 60 years and older; in most trials, training was performed two to three times per week at high intensity [7]. Resistance training had a large effect on muscle strength (standardised mean difference [SMD] 0.84, 95% CI 0.67–1.00; 73 trials, 3,059 participants), a moderate-to-large effect on the time needed to rise from a chair (SMD −0.94, 95% CI −1.49 to −0.38; 11 trials, 384 participants), and a modest improvement in gait speed (mean difference 0.08 m/s, 95% CI 0.04–0.12; 24 trials, 1,179 participants) [7]. Because chair rising and walking speed are closely linked to independence, these functional effects are arguably more relevant to healthy ageing than strength gains alone. These findings underpin current position statements that recommend resistance training for all older adults, including those with frailty [8].

More recent syntheses in people with sarcopenia support the same conclusion. In a meta-analysis of 26 studies including 1,191 older adults with sarcopenia, resistance training improved knee-extension strength (SMD 1.36, 95% CI 0.71–2.02) and gait speed (SMD 2.01, 95% CI 1.04–2.97), and mixed training improved both outcomes to a lesser degree; all training modes improved Timed Up and Go performance, whereas chair-stand performance did not change significantly [9]. Heterogeneity in this analysis was high, so the magnitude of the effects should be interpreted cautiously. Current expert guidance describes resistance exercise as the first-line treatment for sarcopenia and proposes two sessions per week, combining upper- and lower-body exercises, performed with a relatively high degree of effort for one to three sets of 6–12 repetitions, for at least 12 weeks [10].

Whether the benefits extend to unsupervised training at home is directly relevant to programmes delivered online or through video. A meta-analysis of RCTs of unsupervised home-based resistance training in adults aged 60 years and older found significant but modest improvements in lower-limb strength (Hedges' g 0.33, 95% CI 0.11–0.57), muscle power measured by the sit-to-stand test (g 0.44, 95% CI 0.06–0.84), and postural sway (g 0.32, 95% CI 0.16–0.49) [11]. The authors described the evidence as preliminary and highlighted the need to improve adherence [11]. Taken together, these data suggest that home programmes are worthwhile but are likely to produce smaller effects than supervised, progressively loaded training.

3.2 Cognition

The relationship between resistance training and cognition is supported by a growing but less mature evidence base. A meta-analysis of 18 studies found that resistance training improved overall cognitive function in both cognitively healthy older adults (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.00–1.08) and those with cognitive impairment (SMD 0.60) [12]. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of 44 RCTs with 4,793 older adults estimated that clinically relevant cognitive improvements could be achieved from about 724 MET-minutes of exercise per week and reported that resistance exercise produced larger effects than other modalities [13]. The wide confidence interval in the first analysis and the indirect comparisons inherent in network meta-analysis mean that these findings are best regarded as supportive rather than definitive.

3.3 Mortality and chronic disease (observational evidence)

Several meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies have examined muscle-strengthening activity in relation to mortality. Momma and colleagues pooled 16 studies and found that muscle-strengthening activities were associated with a 10–17% lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, total cancer, diabetes, and lung cancer, independently of aerobic activity; for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, and total cancer the association was J-shaped, with the greatest risk reduction at approximately 30–60 minutes per week [14]. A separate meta-analysis of 10 studies reported a relative risk of 0.85 (95% CI 0.77–0.93) for all-cause mortality with any versus no resistance training, with a maximum risk reduction of 27% at around 60 minutes per week [15]. The most recent large analysis, which followed 147,374 participants from three United States cohorts for up to 30 years, found that 90–119 minutes per week of resistance training was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81–0.95), with no additional benefit beyond about 120 minutes per week; risk was lower still when resistance training was combined with aerobic activity (for example, HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.50–0.60 for 60–119 minutes per week of resistance training with 30 to less than 45 MET-hours per week of aerobic activity), although at the highest aerobic volumes additional resistance training conferred little further reduction [16].

These studies are consistent in direction but share the limitations of observational research. Exposure was usually self-reported, and people who engage in resistance training may differ from those who do not in ways that are not fully captured by statistical adjustment. The findings therefore indicate an association and support current guideline recommendations, but they do not establish that resistance training itself causes the lower mortality observed.

3.4 Prescription

The NSCA position statement recommends that older adults train two to three times per week, progressing toward multiple sets of 8–12 repetitions per major muscle group, and notes that 10–15 repetitions are suitable for beginners and that training to failure is not required [8]. The ACSM similarly suggests 10–15 repetitions at light-to-moderate loads for older or previously sedentary people starting resistance exercise [17]. In summary, resistance training has direct and established evidence for improving strength and physical function in older adults, supportive evidence for cognitive benefit, and consistent observational evidence linking it with lower mortality.

4. Balance training and fall prevention

4.1 Effects on falls

The evidence that exercise prevents falls in community-dwelling older people is among the most robust in exercise science. The 2019 Cochrane review included 108 RCTs with 23,407 participants from 25 countries [18]. Compared with control, exercise reduced the rate of falls by 23% (rate ratio [RaR] 0.77, 95% CI 0.71–0.83; 59 studies, 12,981 participants) and the number of people experiencing one or more falls by 15% (risk ratio [RR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.81–0.89), both supported by high-certainty evidence [18]. Programmes based primarily on balance and functional exercises reduced the rate of falls by 24% (RaR 0.76, 95% CI 0.70–0.81; high certainty), and programmes combining multiple exercise types, typically balance and functional exercise with resistance training, probably reduced the rate of falls by 34% (RaR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50–0.88; moderate certainty) [18,19]. By contrast, the effects of resistance training alone, dance, and walking on falls were uncertain, and no trials compared flexibility or endurance training alone with control [18].

The distinction matters for programme design. Strength contributes to postural control, but the Cochrane findings indicate that balance must be trained specifically if fall prevention is a goal. An earlier meta-analysis found that programmes providing a high challenge to balance and more than three hours of exercise per week produced the largest effects, with a 39% reduction in the rate of falls (RaR 0.61) [20]. The World Falls Guidelines accordingly advise that all older adults receive advice on falls prevention and physical activity, recommend that exercise programmes for community-dwelling older adults include balance and functional exercises such as sit-to-stand and stepping, delivered three or more times per week, and recommend individualised, supervised exercise in long-term care settings [21].

4.2 Effects on balance performance and dose

In healthy community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and older, a meta-analysis of 23 RCTs (1,220 participants) found that balance training improved static and dynamic steady-state balance, proactive and reactive balance, and balance test batteries, with effect sizes ranging from small to large [22]. Exploratory dose analyses suggested that programmes lasting 11–12 weeks, with three sessions per week of 31–45 minutes and a total of 91–120 minutes per week, were associated with the largest improvements [22]. These dose estimates should be regarded as preliminary: 17 of the 23 trials were of low methodological quality, heterogeneity was high, and the analysis did not establish whether balance gains translate into fewer falls [22].

4.3 The Otago Exercise Programme

The Otago Exercise Programme illustrates how balance and strength training can be delivered at home with minimal equipment. It was first evaluated in a randomised trial of a general-practice-based home exercise programme for women aged 80 years and older [23]. A subsequent meta-analysis of seven trials including 1,503 participants found that the programme reduced the rate of falls (incidence rate ratio 0.68) [24]. The programme combines progressive lower-limb strengthening with balance exercises performed while holding a stable support, an approach that has been widely adopted in home-based and video-delivered programmes.

Overall, balance and functional exercise has direct, high-certainty evidence for reducing falls in community-dwelling older adults, and the benefit appears to depend on sufficient challenge, frequency, and duration.

5. Tai chi

5.1 Falls and balance

Tai chi combines slow, continuous weight shifting, trunk rotation, and coordinated breathing, and therefore trains balance in a manner that differs from conventional exercise. In the Cochrane review, tai chi reduced the number of people who fell (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70–0.91; high-certainty evidence) and may reduce the rate of falls (RaR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67–0.99; low-certainty evidence) [18]. A 2023 meta-analysis of 24 RCTs reached a similar conclusion: tai chi reduced the risk of being a faller (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.71–0.82) and the number of falls per person, and improved Timed Up and Go performance (mean difference −0.69 s), functional reach, and Berg Balance Scale scores, although Short Physical Performance Battery and fear-of-falling scores did not change significantly [25]. The authors detected publication bias in the fallers analysis, although the effect remained significant after trim-and-fill adjustment, and they restricted inclusion to English-language trials [25].

The largest single trial compared a therapeutically tailored form of tai chi (Tai Ji Quan: Moving for Better Balance) with multimodal exercise and with stretching in 670 adults aged 70 years and older who had fallen in the previous year or had impaired mobility [26]. After 24 weeks of two 60-minute sessions per week, the incidence of falls was 58% lower than with stretching (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.42, 95% CI 0.31–0.56) and 31% lower than with multimodal exercise (IRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52–0.94) [26]. This trial is notable because it compared tai chi with an active exercise programme rather than with an inactive control.

5.2 Cognition, sleep, and wider health outcomes

An overview of 210 systematic reviews found that 58% of 114 effect estimates showed clinically important benefits of tai chi across a range of conditions, with the most consistent benefits for falls risk, Parkinson's disease, knee osteoarthritis, low back pain, and cardiovascular conditions including hypertension [27]. However, only 7.0% of the estimates were supported by high-certainty evidence and 55.3% by low- or very-low-certainty evidence, mainly because of risk of bias and imprecision [27].

For cognition, the strongest single trial randomised 318 older adults with mild cognitive impairment or self-reported memory concerns to cognitively enhanced tai chi, standard tai chi, or stretching, delivered at home by real-time videoconference for one hour twice weekly over 24 weeks [28]. Cognitively enhanced tai chi improved Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores by 2.8 points more than stretching and 1.5 points more than standard tai chi, reduced the cost of dual-task walking, and the effects persisted at 48 weeks [28]. The trial had no non-exercise control group, and its findings apply to people with early cognitive concerns. A 2024 meta-analysis of nine RCTs (1,046 participants) in mild cognitive impairment reported a large pooled improvement in MoCA scores (SMD 1.43, 95% CI 0.93–1.93), but all outcomes were rated as low certainty because of small trials, heterogeneity, and lack of blinding [29].

Tai chi may also improve sleep. In an RCT of 320 adults aged 60 years and older with chronic insomnia, 12 weeks of tai chi improved actigraphy-measured sleep efficiency by 3.4 percentage points (95% CI 1.6–5.1) relative to a control group, an effect similar to that of conventional exercise, and the benefits were maintained at 24 months, although the absolute improvements were modest [30].

In summary, tai chi has direct evidence for reducing falls and improving balance, including in older adults at high risk, and supportive evidence for benefits on cognition in people with early cognitive impairment and on sleep. Its suitability for home delivery by videoconference has also been demonstrated in a large trial [28].

6. Pilates

Pilates is a low-impact method that emphasises trunk control, breathing, alignment, and controlled movement through range, and it is frequently adapted for older adults using mat or chair-based exercises. Its evidence base has expanded considerably, and several meta-analyses have been published since 2021.

The broadest synthesis included 39 studies in older adults and compared Pilates mainly with habitual activity or no exercise [31]. Pilates produced moderate improvements in balance (effect size [ES] 0.36, 95% CI 0.21–0.50; low certainty), muscle strength (ES 0.63, 95% CI 0.44–0.81; moderate certainty), flexibility (ES 0.41, 95% CI 0.16–0.67; low certainty), and functional performance (ES 0.51, 95% CI 0.32–0.72; low certainty), and a large effect on outcomes classified as risk of falls (ES 0.90, 95% CI 0.41–1.38; moderate certainty) [31]. The last estimate derives from heterogeneous measures in relatively small trials and is not equivalent to the falls-rate evidence from the large trials summarised in Section 4.

A meta-analytical review of 51 RCTs including 2,485 participants aged 55 years and older (mean age 66.5 years) provides important context on comparators [32]. Against inactive controls, Pilates produced moderate improvements in physiological outcomes such as strength, balance, flexibility, and physical functioning (SMD 0.68, 95% CI 0.44–0.91 in healthy older adults) and in psychological outcomes including quality of life, depressive symptoms, sleep, and fear of falling (SMD 0.62, 95% CI 0.30–0.94) [32]. Against active controls, however, the physiological effect in healthy older adults was small (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.02–0.53), and the psychological effects were not statistically significant [32]. Heterogeneity was substantial, and no adverse events were reported in the included studies [32].

Two further meta-analyses focused on balance. One pooled 20 RCTs with 930 older adults and found improvements in combined (d 0.65, 95% CI 0.49–0.81), dynamic (d 0.73, 95% CI 0.51–0.96), and static balance (d 0.56, 95% CI 0.26–0.85) [33]. Another included 27 trials with 1,017 adults aged 60 years and older and reported a small effect on static balance (ES 0.27, 95% CI 0.18–0.36) and a moderate effect on dynamic balance (ES 0.71, 95% CI 0.43–1.00) [34]. In the latter analysis, trials of lower methodological quality showed larger effects on dynamic balance than higher-quality trials (ES 0.93 versus 0.52), indicating that pooled estimates may be inflated by weaker studies [34].

The consistent direction of these findings supports Pilates as a reasonable option for improving balance, strength, and flexibility in older adults. The evidence is nonetheless less mature than for resistance or balance training: certainty is mostly low to moderate, many trials are small, comparisons against other active exercise show smaller effects, and none of the reviews identified here pooled large trials with prospectively recorded falls as the primary outcome.

7. Flexibility and mobility training

7.1 Effects on range of motion

Flexibility training is commonly recommended for older adults to preserve the range of motion needed for daily tasks such as dressing, reaching, and turning. There is good evidence that regular stretching increases range of motion. The most comprehensive meta-analysis, which assessed 77 studies and 186 effect sizes, found that chronic stretch training increased range of motion with a moderate effect compared with controls (ES 1.00, 95% CI 0.84–1.17) [35]. Static stretching and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation produced greater gains than ballistic or dynamic stretching, whereas stretching volume, intensity, and frequency did not significantly moderate the effect, and no significant relationship with age was observed [35]. Because this review was not restricted to older adults, it provides indirect rather than direct evidence for this population.

Trials in older adults are generally small. In one single-group study of adults aged 62–85 years, ten weeks of static stretching of the ankle plantar flexors (four 30-second stretches, at least three times per week) increased ankle dorsiflexion by about 9 degrees, with only a small change in tissue hardness, consistent with increased stretch tolerance rather than reduced muscle stiffness [36]; the absence of a control group limits causal interpretation. In a small randomised study of 31 healthy older adults, 12 weeks of supervised flexibility training combined with either strength or dynamic exercise improved sit-and-reach performance by 9% and 23%, respectively, while the control group did not change significantly [37].

7.2 Transfer to function and the role of resistance training

The central uncertainty is whether gains in range of motion translate into better everyday function. A systematic review of 22 intervention studies in healthy adults aged 65 years and older concluded that flexibility-specific programmes may improve range of motion but that evidence for effects on functional outcomes and daily functioning was conflicting, largely because interventions, body regions, and functional measures varied widely [38]. The Cochrane falls review identified no trials comparing flexibility training alone with control for fall prevention [18].

Resistance training offers a second route to improved mobility. A meta-analysis of 55 studies found that resistance training improved range of motion (ES 0.73, 95% CI 0.55–0.91) and did not differ significantly from stretching (ES 0.08, 95% CI −0.56 to 0.73); age did not moderate the effect, although participants were predominantly young (mean age 23.9 years) [39]. An earlier meta-analysis of 11 studies similarly found no difference between strength training and stretching for range of motion [40]. These findings suggest that full-range resistance exercise can maintain or improve mobility while also building strength, which may be an efficient approach for older adults with limited time.

The ACSM recommends flexibility exercises on at least two to three days per week, noting that older adults may benefit from holding static stretches for 30–60 seconds [17]. In summary, flexibility training has established effects on range of motion, indirect support from studies across the age spectrum, and uncertain effects on daily function and falls when performed in isolation. It is best regarded as a complement to strength and balance training rather than a substitute.

8. Meditation and mindfulness

Meditation differs from the other modalities in that it places little demand on the musculoskeletal or cardiovascular systems. Its proposed contributions to healthy ageing concern attention, emotional regulation, stress, mood, and sleep, and it is included in many mind–body programmes alongside physical practice.

8.1 Cognition

The cognitive effects of mindfulness in older adults appear real but small. A three-level meta-analysis of 30 RCTs in older adults found a small positive effect of mindfulness interventions on cognition (Hedges' g 0.36, 95% CI 0.06–0.65), with significant effects for attention, long-term memory, and visuospatial processing [41]. The effect was significant in healthy older adults (g 0.27) but not in those with mild cognitive impairment (g −0.09) [41]. A broader meta-analysis of mindfulness-based programmes in adults reported a smaller overall effect (g 0.15, 95% CI 0.05–0.24), limited mainly to executive function and working memory; in the subgroup of adults aged 60 years and older the effect was g 0.21 (95% CI 0.04–0.38) [42]. Importantly, mindfulness programmes outperformed inactive controls but not active comparators, and risk of bias was mostly unclear [42].

A 2025 meta-analysis of 25 RCTs (2,095 participants) in people with subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, or Alzheimer's disease reported that meditation improved Mini-Mental State Examination scores (mean difference 2.22 points, 95% CI 0.83–3.62), but heterogeneity was very high and the certainty of evidence was rated low; meditation was not superior to active comparators such as health education, tai chi, or aerobic exercise [43]. The same analysis reported improved sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index mean difference −1.40, 95% CI −2.52 to −0.27) but no significant effect on depressive symptoms [43].

The most rigorous long-term test is the Age-Well trial, which randomised 137 cognitively unimpaired adults aged 65 years and older (mean age 69.4 years) to 18 months of meditation training, non-native language training, or no intervention [44]. Meditation did not significantly change the volume or perfusion of the anterior cingulate cortex or insula, the prespecified primary outcomes, compared with either control condition [44]. Adherence was high, and meditation was superior to language training on a self-reported global composite score [44]. This null primary result indicates that measurable changes in these brain regions did not emerge from 18 months of meditation training in later life.

8.2 Depression and well-being

Evidence is stronger for mood than for cognition. A meta-analysis of 19 studies including 1,076 older adults (mean age 71.8 years) found that mindfulness meditation interventions reduced depressive symptoms with a moderate effect (g 0.65, 95% CI 0.35–0.94) compared with controls [45]. Effects were larger in shorter interventions, in programmes using guided meditation, and in studies conducted in Asia, which suggests that intervention format and context matter [45].

In summary, meditation has supportive evidence for reducing depressive symptoms and small effects on some cognitive domains in older adults, but it has not been shown to alter brain structure in a long-term trial, and its cognitive effects do not exceed those of other active interventions. It is therefore best positioned as a complement to physical exercise for mental well-being rather than as a primary strategy for physical or cognitive ageing.

9. Integrating the modalities

9.1 Comparative evidence

Direct comparisons between modalities are relatively few, and most comparative information comes from network meta-analyses that rely partly on indirect comparisons. Several consistent patterns nevertheless emerge. For fall prevention, programmes that combine balance and functional exercise with other components such as resistance training produce the largest effects [18], and a therapeutic form of tai chi reduced falls more than a multimodal exercise programme in a large trial [26]. For strength and physical function, progressive resistance training has the most direct evidence [7,9]. For cognition, network meta-analysis favours resistance exercise among the modalities studied [13], while mind–body approaches show benefit mainly in people with early cognitive impairment [28,29].

For mental health, the modalities appear more interchangeable. A network meta-analysis of 218 RCTs including 14,170 adults with depression found moderate reductions in depressive symptoms with walking or jogging (g −0.62), yoga (g −0.55), strength training (g −0.49), mixed aerobic exercise (g −0.43), and tai chi or qigong (g −0.42), although confidence in these estimates was low or very low and the analysis was not specific to older adults [46]. In older adults with clinical depression, a network meta-analysis of 15 RCTs (596 participants) found that mind–body, aerobic, and resistance exercise all reduced depressive symptoms, with no statistically significant differences between them, leading the authors to suggest that older adults can choose the type of exercise they prefer [47]. Observational data also suggest that combining resistance training with aerobic activity is associated with lower mortality than resistance training alone [16].

These findings support a complementary rather than competitive view of the modalities. Resistance training provides the foundation for strength and function; balance training and tai chi target postural control and falls; Pilates and flexibility training contribute range of motion and movement control; and meditation and mind–body practice address mood, stress, and sleep. This pattern is consistent with the WHO recommendation that older adults undertake varied multicomponent activity emphasising functional balance and strength training [2]. Table 1 summarises the evidence by modality and outcome, and Table 2 summarises guideline-based dosing.

Table 1. Summary of evidence by modality and outcome in older adults

Modality	Outcome	Main finding	Type of evidence	Ref.
Resistance training	Muscle strength	Large improvement (SMD 0.84)	Direct; 121 RCTs	[7]
Resistance training	Chair rise, gait speed	SMD −0.94 for chair rise; +0.08 m/s gait speed	Direct	[7]
Resistance training	Cognition	SMD 0.54 to 0.60	Supportive; small trials	[12,13]
Resistance training	All-cause mortality	10–17% lower risk; RR 0.85	Observational association	[14–16]
Balance and functional exercise	Rate of falls	24% reduction (RaR 0.76)	Direct; high certainty	[18]
Multicomponent exercise	Rate of falls	34% reduction (RaR 0.66)	Direct; moderate certainty	[18]
Tai chi	Number of fallers	RR 0.80 (Cochrane); RR 0.76 (2023 meta-analysis)	Direct; high certainty for fallers	[18,25]
Tai chi	Cognition in MCI	MoCA +2.8 points vs stretching	Direct (one large RCT); low-certainty meta-analysis	[28,29]
Tai chi	Sleep in insomnia	Sleep efficiency +3.4 percentage points	Direct (one RCT)	[30]
Pilates	Balance, strength, flexibility	Moderate effects (ES 0.36–0.63)	Direct; low to moderate certainty	[31–34]
Flexibility training	Range of motion	Moderate effect (ES 1.00)	Indirect (all ages)	[35]
Flexibility training	Daily function	Conflicting	Uncertain	[38]
Meditation	Cognition	Small effects (g 0.15–0.36)	Direct; small effects	[41,42]
Meditation	Brain structure	No effect after 18 months	Direct (one RCT)	[44]
Meditation	Depressive symptoms	Moderate reduction (g 0.65)	Direct	[45]

ES, effect size; MCI, mild cognitive impairment; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment; RaR, rate ratio; RCT, randomised controlled trial; RR, risk ratio; SMD, standardised mean difference.

Table 2. Guideline-based dosing for adults in later life

Component	Recommendation	Source
Aerobic activity	150–300 min/week of moderate-intensity activity	WHO 2020 [2]
Muscle strengthening	All major muscle groups, at least 2 days/week	WHO 2020 [2]
Multicomponent activity	Functional balance and strength training, at least 3 days/week	WHO 2020 [2]
Resistance training	2–3 sessions/week, progressing to multiple sets of 8–12 repetitions; beginners 10–15 repetitions	NSCA 2019 [8]; ACSM 2011 [17]
Resistance training for sarcopenia	2 sessions/week, 1–3 sets of 6–12 repetitions at relatively high effort, at least 12 weeks	Hurst 2022 [10]
Balance and functional exercise	At least 3 times/week for community-dwelling older adults	World Falls Guidelines 2022 [21]
Balance training dose	11–12 weeks, 3 sessions/week, 31–45 min per session (preliminary)	Lesinski 2015 [22]
Flexibility	At least 2–3 days/week; older adults may hold static stretches 30–60 s	ACSM 2011 [17]

10. Safety and practical considerations

The available data suggest that exercise is generally safe for community-dwelling older adults when it is appropriately prescribed and progressed, although safety reporting in trials is often incomplete. In the Cochrane falls review, adverse events were reported in 27 trials; where reported they were predominantly non-serious and musculoskeletal, and two serious events occurred in a single trial [18]. In the Cochrane review of progressive resistance training, adverse events were inconsistently monitored and reported, and the authors advised some caution, particularly for frail individuals and those recovering from illness [7]. No adverse events were reported in the trials included in a large meta-analytical review of Pilates [32], and in an overview of tai chi systematic reviews, the six effect estimates that addressed adverse events indicated a risk equivalent to that of control conditions [27]. The absence of reported harm should not be equated with demonstrated safety, because many trials excluded people with significant comorbidity and did not monitor adverse events systematically.

Several practical principles follow from the evidence. Programmes should begin at a level matched to current capacity and progress gradually in load, balance challenge, or hold duration, because the benefits observed in trials were obtained with progressive programmes delivered over weeks to months rather than single sessions [7,18,22]. Balance exercises can be performed beside a stable support, with hand support reduced as steadiness improves, as in the Otago programme [23,24]. Supervision, at least initially, may improve technique and adherence, which is a recognised limitation of unsupervised home programmes [10,11]. Older adults at high risk of falling should be offered a comprehensive multifactorial falls-risk assessment rather than exercise advice alone [21]. People with osteoporosis or increased fracture risk, recent surgery or injury, cardiovascular disease, joint replacement, or significant balance impairment should consult an appropriately qualified healthcare professional before starting a new programme, and movements that cause pain, dizziness, chest discomfort, or unusual breathlessness should be stopped.

Finally, adherence is the practical determinant of benefit. Because the mental-health benefits of different modalities appear broadly similar [46,47], and because several modalities improve balance and function, individual preference, accessibility, and enjoyment are legitimate considerations when selecting among evidence-based options.

11. Strengths, limitations, and research gaps

11.1 Strengths and limitations of this review

This review integrates six commonly recommended modalities within a single framework, prioritises recent systematic reviews and large trials, distinguishes direct from indirect and emerging evidence, and reports certainty ratings where the source reviews provided them. Bibliographic details were verified against DOI and publisher records, and syntheses with internal numerical inconsistencies were excluded.

Several limitations should be acknowledged. As a narrative review, it did not use a registered protocol, duplicate screening, formal risk-of-bias assessment, or quantitative pooling, and relevant studies may have been missed. PubMed could not be queried directly, although PubMed-indexed records were identified through other routes. Many included meta-analyses overlap in their primary trials, so consistent findings across reviews should not be read as independent replication. Most included trials enrolled adults aged 60 or 65 years and older, so conclusions for adults aged 50–59 years rely on extrapolation; some sources, including the largest stretching and resistance-training range-of-motion analyses and the depression network meta-analysis, included younger adults. Finally, several Pilates, flexibility, and meditation analyses showed high heterogeneity, small trials, or larger effects in lower-quality studies, which limits the precision of their estimates.

11.2 Research gaps

The following gaps are particularly relevant to healthy ageing in adults aged 50 years and older. First, adequately powered RCTs with prospectively recorded falls as the primary outcome are needed for Pilates and for flexibility-based programmes. Second, trials in adults aged 50–64 years are needed to establish whether midlife training delays the onset of functional decline. Third, head-to-head comparisons of modalities, and of combined programmes against single modalities, would reduce reliance on indirect comparisons. Fourth, longer follow-up is required for cognitive outcomes, as illustrated by the null structural findings of an 18-month meditation trial [44]. Fifth, the effectiveness, safety, and adherence of video-delivered and unsupervised home programmes deserve further study, given their growing use and the encouraging results of videoconference-delivered tai chi [11,28]. Finally, consistent and systematic reporting of adverse events would strengthen the safety evidence for all modalities.

12. Conclusions

The evidence reviewed here supports exercise as a central component of healthy ageing, but the strength of evidence differs substantially between modalities. Progressive resistance training has direct and established evidence for improving muscle strength, chair-rise performance, and gait speed in older adults, and regular muscle-strengthening activity is consistently associated with lower mortality in observational studies. Balance and functional exercise, particularly when combined with other exercise types, reduces the rate of falls in community-dwelling older people on the basis of high-certainty evidence, and tai chi reduces the number of people who fall and has shown benefit over conventional multimodal exercise in a large trial. Pilates improves balance, strength, and flexibility, but its evidence is of low to moderate certainty and its advantage over other active exercise is small. Stretching increases range of motion, whereas its effect on daily function in isolation remains uncertain. Meditation produces moderate reductions in depressive symptoms and small cognitive effects, but did not alter brain structure in a long-term trial.

For adults aged 50 years and older, these findings support a multicomponent approach consistent with WHO recommendations: resistance training on at least two days per week, balance-focused activity such as balance training or tai chi on three or more days per week, mobility and flexibility work as a complement, and mind–body practices for mental well-being. Because most evidence comes from people aged 60 years and older, and because several modalities rest on small or heterogeneous trials, larger and longer studies, including trials in midlife, are needed to refine these recommendations.

Declarations

Funding: This work received no external funding. No third party provided financial or commercial support for the preparation of this review.

Conflicts of Interest: The author is the founder of Healthy Habits Coaching, a nutrition and healthy-habits coaching and educational platform through which the author provides coaching services and publishes health and nutrition educational content, including narrative reviews. Some subject areas addressed by Healthy Habits Coaching may overlap with topics discussed in this article. Healthy Habits Coaching did not provide external sponsorship for this review, and no third party provided financial or commercial support for its preparation. The author's relationship with Healthy Habits Coaching is disclosed for transparency as a potential commercial and/or non-financial interest. The author reports no other conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Author Contributions: Ori Scott: Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; Validation; Writing—review and editing; Project administration. Ori Scott conceived the review topic and scope, defined the research questions and evidence-selection framework, evaluated the scientific relevance of the literature and the interpretation of the evidence, critically revised the article, and approved the final version. The author accepts full responsibility for the integrity and final content of the work.

Ethics Statement: Ethics approval was not required because this narrative review is based exclusively on previously published literature and involved no recruitment of human participants, collection of identifiable personal information, or original research involving human participants or animals.

Patient Consent: Not applicable. The article contains no original participant data, identifiable patient information, or clinical images requiring patient consent.

Consent for Publication: Not applicable.

Data Availability: No original participant-level data or research dataset was generated for this narrative review. The evidence discussed in the article is derived from published literature cited in the reference list.

Acknowledgements: None.

Artificial Intelligence Disclosure: Claude (Anthropic) was used as an assistive tool during article preparation for literature identification, bibliographic verification, organization, drafting, language refinement, revision, and presentation of material. AI-generated output was reviewed and edited by the author and was not treated as an independent scientific source or author. The author determined the review question and scope, evaluated the scientific relevance of the literature, assessed the interpretation and limitations of the evidence presented, critically revised the article, and approved the final version. The author retains full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, references, scientific interpretation, and content of the article.

Publication Statement: This narrative review was prepared for publication by Healthy Habits Coaching as independent health and nutrition educational content. It has not undergone external journal peer review unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Educational Disclaimer: This content is provided for educational purposes and is not a substitute for individualized medical diagnosis or treatment. Consult an appropriately qualified healthcare professional regarding personal medical decisions.

References

1. Strain T, Flaxman S, Guthold R, Semenova E, Cowan M, Riley LM, et al. National, regional, and global trends in insufficient physical activity among adults from 2000 to 2022: a pooled analysis of 507 population-based surveys with 5.7 million participants. Lancet Glob Health. 2024;12(8):e1232–e1243. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00150-5. (Erratum published 2025.)

2. Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, Borodulin K, Buman MP, Cardon G, et al. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(24):1451–1462. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955

3. World Health Organization. Falls [fact sheet]. Geneva: WHO; 26 April 2021. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/falls

4. Studenski S, Perera S, Patel K, Rosano C, Faulkner K, Inzitari M, et al. Gait speed and survival in older adults. JAMA. 2011;305(1):50–58. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1923

5. Leong DP, Teo KK, Rangarajan S, Lopez-Jaramillo P, Avezum A Jr, Orlandini A, et al. Prognostic value of grip strength: findings from the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Lancet. 2015;386(9990):266–273. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62000-6

6. Izquierdo M, Merchant RA, Morley JE, Anker SD, Aprahamian I, Arai H, et al. International Exercise Recommendations in Older Adults (ICFSR): expert consensus guidelines. J Nutr Health Aging. 2021;25(7):824–853. doi:10.1007/s12603-021-1665-8

7. Liu CJ, Latham NK. Progressive resistance strength training for improving physical function in older adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(3):CD002759. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002759.pub2

8. Fragala MS, Cadore EL, Dorgo S, Izquierdo M, Kraemer WJ, Peterson MD, et al. Resistance training for older adults: position statement from the National Strength and Conditioning Association. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33(8):2019–2052. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000003230

9. Lu L, Mao L, Feng Y, Ainsworth BE, Liu Y, Chen N. Effects of different exercise training modes on muscle strength and physical performance in older people with sarcopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Geriatr. 2021;21:708. doi:10.1186/s12877-021-02642-8

10. Hurst C, Robinson SM, Witham MD, Dodds RM, Granic A, Buckland C, et al. Resistance exercise as a treatment for sarcopenia: prescription and delivery. Age Ageing. 2022;51(2):afac003. doi:10.1093/ageing/afac003

11. Mañas A, Gómez-Redondo P, Valenzuela PL, Morales JS, Lucía A, Ara I. Unsupervised home-based resistance training for community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ageing Res Rev. 2021;69:101368. doi:10.1016/j.arr.2021.101368

12. Coelho-Junior H, Marzetti E, Calvani R, Picca A, Arai H, Uchida M. Resistance training improves cognitive function in older adults with different cognitive status: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Ment Health. 2022;26(2):213–224. doi:10.1080/13607863.2020.1857691

13. Gallardo-Gómez D, del Pozo-Cruz J, Noetel M, Álvarez-Barbosa F, Alfonso-Rosa RM, del Pozo Cruz B. Optimal dose and type of exercise to improve cognitive function in older adults: a systematic review and bayesian model-based network meta-analysis of RCTs. Ageing Res Rev. 2022;76:101591. doi:10.1016/j.arr.2022.101591

14. Momma H, Kawakami R, Honda T, Sawada SS. Muscle-strengthening activities are associated with lower risk and mortality in major non-communicable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Br J Sports Med. 2022;56(13):755–763. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2021-105061

15. Shailendra P, Baldock KL, Li LSK, Bennie JA, Boyle T. Resistance training and mortality risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med. 2022;63(2):277–285. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2022.03.020

16. Zhang Y, Lee DH, Rezende LFM, Ma Y, Giovannucci E. Long-term resistance training with all-cause and cause-specific mortality: assessing dose–response and joint associations with aerobic physical activity. Br J Sports Med. 2026;60(12):874. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2025-110503

17. Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ, Lee IM, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(7):1334–1359. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb

18. Sherrington C, Fairhall NJ, Wallbank GK, Tiedemann A, Michaleff ZA, Howard K, et al. Exercise for preventing falls in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;(1):CD012424. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012424.pub2

19. Sherrington C, Fairhall N, Wallbank G, Tiedemann A, Michaleff ZA, Howard K, et al. Exercise for preventing falls in older people living in the community: an abridged Cochrane systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(15):885–891. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-101512

20. Sherrington C, Michaleff ZA, Fairhall N, Paul SS, Tiedemann A, Whitney J, et al. Exercise to prevent falls in older adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51(24):1750–1758. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-096547

21. Montero-Odasso M, van der Velde N, Martin FC, Petrovic M, Tan MP, Ryg J, et al.; World Falls Guidelines Task Force. World guidelines for falls prevention and management for older adults: a global initiative. Age Ageing. 2022;51(9):afac205. doi:10.1093/ageing/afac205

22. Lesinski M, Hortobágyi T, Muehlbauer T, Gollhofer A, Granacher U. Effects of balance training on balance performance in healthy older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2015;45:1721–1738. doi:10.1007/s40279-015-0375-y

23. Campbell AJ, Robertson MC, Gardner MM, Norton RN, Tilyard MW, Buchner DM. Randomised controlled trial of a general practice programme of home based exercise to prevent falls in elderly women. BMJ. 1997;315(7115):1065–1069. doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7115.1065

24. Thomas S, Mackintosh S, Halbert J. Does the 'Otago exercise programme' reduce mortality and falls in older adults? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing. 2010;39(6):681–687. doi:10.1093/ageing/afq102

25. Chen W, Li M, Li H, Lin Y, Feng Z. Tai Chi for fall prevention and balance improvement in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1236050. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1236050

26. Li F, Harmer P, Fitzgerald K, Eckstrom E, Akers L, Chou LS, et al. Effectiveness of a therapeutic Tai Ji Quan intervention vs a multimodal exercise intervention to prevent falls among older adults at high risk of falling: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(10):1301–1310. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3915

27. Yang GY, Hunter J, Bu FL, Hao WL, Zhang H, Wayne PM, et al. Determining the safety and effectiveness of Tai Chi: a critical overview of 210 systematic reviews of controlled clinical trials. Syst Rev. 2022;11(1):260. doi:10.1186/s13643-022-02100-5

28. Li F, Harmer P, Eckstrom E, Fitzgerald K, Winters-Stone K. Clinical effectiveness of cognitively enhanced Tai Ji Quan training on global cognition and dual-task performance during walking in older adults with mild cognitive impairment or self-reported memory concerns: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2023;176(11):1498–1507. doi:10.7326/M23-1603

29. Shao X, Xi Y, Pan L, Li X, Lin Q, Tian K, et al. The effectiveness of Tai Chi for patients with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Neurosci. 2024;18:1467595. doi:10.3389/fnins.2024.1467595

30. Siu PM, Yu AP, Tam BT, Chin EC, Yu DS, Chung KF, et al. Effects of Tai Chi or exercise on sleep in older adults with insomnia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(2):e2037199. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37199

31. Fernández-Rodríguez R, Álvarez-Bueno C, Ferri-Morales A, Torres-Costoso A, Pozuelo-Carrascosa DP, Martínez-Vizcaíno V. Pilates improves physical performance and decreases risk of falls in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Physiotherapy. 2021;112:163–177. doi:10.1016/j.physio.2021.05.008

32. Meikis L, Wicker P, Donath L. Effects of Pilates training on physiological and psychological health parameters in healthy older adults and in older adults with clinical conditions over 55 years: a meta-analytical review. Front Neurol. 2021;12:724218. doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.724218

33. Sampaio T, Encarnação S, Santos O, Narciso D, Oliveira JP, Teixeira JE, et al. The effectiveness of Pilates training interventions on older adults' balance: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(23):3083. doi:10.3390/healthcare11233083

34. da Rocha JS, Poton R, Rosa L, da Silva NL, Farinatti P. Pilates and improvement of balance and posture in older adults: a meta-analysis with focus on potential moderators. Health Sci Rev. 2022;5:100054. doi:10.1016/j.hsr.2022.100054

35. Konrad A, Alizadeh S, Daneshjoo A, Hadjizadeh Anvar S, Graham A, Zahiri A, et al. Chronic effects of stretching on range of motion with consideration of potential moderating variables: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Sport Health Sci. 2024;13(2):186–194. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2023.06.002

36. Nakamura M, Scardina A, Thomas E, Warneke K, Konrad A. Chronic effects of a static stretching intervention program on range of motion and tissue hardness in older adults. Front Med (Lausanne). 2024;11:1505775. doi:10.3389/fmed.2024.1505775

37. La Greca S, Rapali M, Ciaprini G, Russo L, Vinciguerra MG, Di Giminiani R. Acute and chronic effects of supervised flexibility training in older adults: a comparison of two different conditioning programs. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(24):16974. doi:10.3390/ijerph192416974

38. Stathokostas L, Little RMD, Vandervoort AA, Paterson DH. Flexibility training and functional ability in older adults: a systematic review. J Aging Res. 2012;2012:306818. doi:10.1155/2012/306818

39. Alizadeh S, Daneshjoo A, Zahiri A, Hadjizadeh Anvar S, Goudini R, Hicks JP, et al. Resistance training induces improvements in range of motion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2023;53(3):707–722. doi:10.1007/s40279-022-01804-x

40. Afonso J, Ramirez-Campillo R, Moscão J, Rocha T, Zacca R, Martins A, et al. Strength training versus stretching for improving range of motion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Healthcare (Basel). 2021;9(4):427. doi:10.3390/healthcare9040427

41. Mirabito G, Verhaeghen P. The effects of mindfulness interventions on older adults' cognition: a meta-analysis. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2023;78(3):394–408. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbac143

42. Whitfield T, Barnhofer T, Acabchuk R, Cohen A, Lee M, Schlosser M, et al. The effect of mindfulness-based programs on cognitive function in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychol Rev. 2022;32(3):677–702. doi:10.1007/s11065-021-09519-y

43. Shi J, Tian H, Wei J, Xu W, Luo Q, Peng J, et al. Meditation for subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Public Health. 2025;13:1524898. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1524898

44. Chételat G, Lutz A, Klimecki O, Frison E, Asselineau J, Schlosser M, et al.; Medit-Ageing Research Group. Effect of an 18-month meditation training on regional brain volume and perfusion in older adults: the Age-Well randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2022;79(11):1165–1174. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.3185

45. Reangsing C, Rittiwong T, Schneider JK. Effects of mindfulness meditation interventions on depression in older adults: a meta-analysis. Aging Ment Health. 2021;25(7):1181–1190. doi:10.1080/13607863.2020.1793901

46. Noetel M, Sanders T, Gallardo-Gómez D, Taylor P, del Pozo Cruz B, van den Hoek D, et al. Effect of exercise for depression: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2024;384:e075847. doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-075847. (Correction: doi:10.1136/bmj.q1024.)

47. Miller KJ, Gonçalves-Bradley DC, Areerob P, Hennessy D, Mesagno C, Grace F. Comparative effectiveness of three exercise types to treat clinical depression in older adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Ageing Res Rev. 2020;58:100999. doi:10.1016/j.arr.2019.100999