ArticleBMJ open2024
Evaluating the impact of movement tracking feedback on engagement with home exercise programmes of children with cerebral palsy using a new therapy app: a protocol for a mixed-methods single-case experimental design with alternating treatments.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05998239 (Testing Bootle Boot Camp - A New Movement Tracking App to Engage Kids in Home Exercise Programs), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Testing Bootle Boot Camp - A New Movement Tracking App to Engage Kids in Home Exercise Programs
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lessons learned while exploring the impact of movement-tracking feedback on the experiences of children with neuromotor disorders taking part in interactive home exercise programs: a multi-case mixed methods study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChildren with cerebral palsy (CP) are prescribed home exercise programmes (HEPs) to increase the frequency of movement practice, yet adherence to HEPs can be low. This paper outlines the protocol for a single-case experimental design (SCED) with alternating treatments, using a new home therapy exercise application, Bootle Boot Camp (BBCamp), offered with and without movement tracking feedback. This study will explore the impact of feedback on engagement, movement quality, lower limb function and family experiences to help understand how technology-supported HEPs should be translated and the added value, if any, of movement tracking technology. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this explanatory sequential mixed-methods study using a SCED, 16 children with CP (aged 6-12 years, Gross Motor Function Classification System levels I-II) will set lower limb goals and be prescribed an individualised HEP by their physiotherapist to complete using BBCamp on their home television equipped with a three-dimensional camera-computer system. Children will complete four weekly exercise sessions over 6 weeks. Children will be randomised to 1 of 16 alternating treatment schedules where BBCamp will provide or withhold feedback during the first 4 weeks. The version of BBCamp that results in the most therapeutic benefit will be continued for 2 final weeks. Goals will be re-evaluated and families interviewed. The primary outcome is adherence (proportion of prescribed exercise repetitions attempted) as a measure of behavioural engagement. Secondary outcomes are affective and cognitive engagement (smiley face ratings), exercise fidelity, lower limb function, goal achievement and participant experiences. SCED data will be analysed using visual and statistical methods. Quantitative and qualitative data will be integrated using joint displays. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Boards at Bloorview Research Institute and the University of Toronto. Results will be distributed through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05998239; pre-results.
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.