BackgroundThe benefit of inpatient comprehensive geriatric assessment on patient survival and function has been demonstrated among frail older patients. However, the influence of outpatient geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) on clinical outcomes remains debated. This study aimed to update the research evidence detailing the effect of outpatient GEM on survival and nursing-home admission through a comparison with conventional care.MethodsCochrane Library, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases were searched up to January 29th, 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including older people over age 55 that compared outpatient GEM with conventional care on mortality (primary outcome) and nursing-home admission (secondary outcome) during a follow-up period of 12 to 36 months.ResultsNineteen reports from 11 studies that recruited 7,993 participants (mean age 70–83) were included. Overall, outpatient GEM significantly reduced mortality (risk ratio (RR) = 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.77–0.99,I2= 12%). For the subgroup analysis categorized by different follow-up periods, its prognostic benefit was only disclosed for 24-month mortality (RR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.51–0.91,I2= 0%), but not for 12- or 15 to 18-month mortality. Furthermore, outpatient GEM had significantly trivial effects on nursing-home admission during the follow-up period of 12 or 24 months (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.74–1.12,I2= 0%).ConclusionsOutpatient GEM led by a geriatrician with a multidisciplinary team improved overall survival, specifically during the 24-month follow-up period. This trivial effect was demonstrated in rates of nursing-home admission. Future research on outpatient GEM involving a larger cohort is warranted to corroborate our findings.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-023-04036-4.