Evidence Hub

Prevalence and related factors of healthy aging: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Linxi Tang, N. S. Rasudin, Yuan Dong, Azlina Yusuf

Belitung Nursing Journal, 2025

300,624 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

Background Healthy aging is a key goal of global public health and aging policy initiatives. Understanding its prevalence and associated determinants is essential for designing targeted interventions and promoting well-being among older adults. Objective This study aimed to estimate the global prevalence of healthy aging and to identify its associated factors across different countries. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS), Scopus, and ProQuest from database inception to February 2025. Two independent reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Methodology Checklist. Eligible studies were included in a meta-analysis using Stata 18.0 and R version 4.5.0. Results A total of 39 studies involving 300,624 participants were included. The pooled prevalence of healthy aging was 23.0% (95% CI: 18%–27%). After adjusting for publication bias using the trim-and-fill method, the estimate decreased to 15.6% (95% CI: 11.0%–20.1%), suggesting possible overestimation in the original estimate. Significant associations with healthy aging were found for age (≥75 years), gender, marital status, educational level, economic level, social participation, employment status, economy, smoking status, alcohol consumption, physical…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 300,624 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free