ArticleFrontiers in physiology2014
The effect of a peer on VO2 and game choice in 6-10 year old children.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Active Video Games' Energy Expenditure in Children with Overweight and Obesity and Differences by Gender.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- VOInternational journal of exercise science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledRelative to sedentary video games (e.g., Playstation 2®), playing physically active video games (e.g., Nintendo Wii Sports Boxing®) significantly increases caloric expenditure in children. Studies have demonstrated that the presence of a peer increases physical activity in children. We sought to determine if children would expend more energy and find playing the "exergame" (Wii) more motivating than the sedentary video game (Playstation 2) when with a peer. Seventeen children (age 8.5 ± 0.4 years) rested, played the sedentary video game and "exergame" for 10 min each, in two conditions: one in which the children rested/played the games alone (alone condition) and another in which they played with a peer (peer condition). Oxygen consumption (VO2), and liking (visual analog scale) was assessed for each 10-min condition. After three 10-min resting/gaming conditions, motivation was assessed using a relative reinforcing value task in which children performed computer mouse presses to gain additional access for either the sedentary video game or "exergame." VO2 was greater (p < 0.001) during "exergame" play (mean = 12.17 ± 4.1 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)) vs. rest (mean = 5.14 ± 1.46 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)) and the sedentary video game (mean = 5.83 ± 2.1 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)). During the peer condition, there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in VO2 relative to the alone condition. In an exploratory analysis boys exhibited a greater (p = 0.02) increase in VO2 from rest to "exergame" (Δ 9.0 ± 3.7 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)), relative to girls (Δ 4.9 ± 2.9 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)). Boys showed a significantly greater increase (p = 0.05) in VO2 from the resting condition to "exergame" in the presence of a peer (Δ 11.1 ± 5.3 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)) vs. the alone condition (Δ 6.8 ± 3.1 ml·kg(-1) ·min(-1)). Liking was significantly (p < 0.001) greater for "exergame" (7.7 ± 1.9 cm) and the sedentary video game (8.3 ± 1.3 cm) relative to rest (4.0 ± 2.8 cm). Motivation for "exergame" significantly decreased (p = 0.03) from alone (340.8 ± 106.8 presses) to the peer condition (147.8 ± 81.6 presses).
conclusionVO2 was greater during "exergame" play relative to the sedentary video game. The presence of a peer did not increase VO2 during "exergame" play. Surprisingly, the presence of a peer decreased children's motivation to play "exergame" vs. the sedentary video game.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.