Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36231643›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Nintendo

Desirée Montoro-Cárdenas, Irene Cortés-Pérez, María Del Rocío Ibancos-Losada, Noelia Zagalaz-Anula, Esteban Obrero-Gaitán, María Catalina Osuna-Pérez

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Desirée Montoro-CárdenasDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain.
Irene Cortés-PérezDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1876-1399
María Del Rocío Ibancos-LosadaDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6233-1786
Noelia Zagalaz-AnulaDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7105-9865
Esteban Obrero-GaitánDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8430-5500
María Catalina Osuna-PérezDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1293-2983
Universidad de Jaén · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNintendo

methodsA systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted from a bibliographic search in PubMed, Scopus, PEDro, Web of Science, and CINHAL, ending in October 2021, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials that compared NWT vs. conventional therapy or no intervention in terms of their impact on different UE impaired abilities (grip strength, tip grip strength, UE dissociated movements, functional capacity in daily living activities, gross and fine motor dexterity, and grasping ability) in children with CP. Effect size was calculated with standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

resultsNine studies (276 participants) were included. NWT is more effective than conventional therapy at improving grip strength (SMD = 0.5, 95% CI 0.08, 0.91), tip grip strength (SMD = 0.95, 95% CI 0.3, 1.61), and grasping ability (SMD = 0.72, 95%CI 0.14, 1.3). NWT is more effective than conventional therapy at improving functional capacity in daily living activities (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI 0.07, 1.56). For fine manual dexterity, NWT was better than no intervention (SMD = 3.12, 95% CI 1.5, 4.7).

conclusionsOur results indicate that NWT is effective at improving various UE impaired motor skills in children with CP.

Indexed as

Cerebral PalsyStroke RehabilitationActivities of Daily LivingChildHumansMotor SkillsUpper Extremityarm functional movementscerebral palsygrip strengthhand dexteritymeta-analysisNintendo® Wiiupper extremityvideogames

Identifiers

PMID36231643
PMCPMC9566093
OpenAlexW4297486086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.