ReviewHeliyon2023
Evaluation of a group-based sensorimotor intervention programme to improve Chinese handwriting of primary school students.
Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Sensorimotor performance is influential in Chinese handwriting, but few studies have examined the efficacy of sensorimotor-based interventions on Chinese handwriting among primary school students with poor handwriting performance. The study aims to evaluate a sensorimotor-based intervention to improve handwriting in the mainstream primary schools. Methods: This study adopted a two-group pretest-posttest design. An 8-session group-based sensorimotor intervention was delivered to school-aged children (mean age = 8.1, 68% male). Group A had 2 sessions every week, while Group B had 4 sessions every week. Analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to test the effects. Results: The intervention had a significant time effect ( Conclusions: The group-based sensorimotor intervention programme appeared to show improvements in students with fair skills in writing Chinese characters. It appears that the effect is better if the training sessions are spaced out in one month rather than intensively conducted within two weeks. It might be related to more involvement from parents, and students need more time for practice after the training sessions.
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.