Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38706921›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2024

Evaluating the influence of feedback on motor skill learning and motor performance for children with developmental coordination disorder: a systematic review.

Ellana Welsby, Brenton Hordacre, David Hobbs, Joanne Bouckley, Emily Ward, Susan Hillier

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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.

Ellana WelsbyInnovation, Implementation, and Clinical Translation (IIMACT) in Health, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Brenton HordacreInnovation, Implementation, and Clinical Translation (IIMACT) in Health, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
David HobbsInnovation, Implementation, and Clinical Translation (IIMACT) in Health, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Joanne BouckleyInnovation, Implementation, and Clinical Translation (IIMACT) in Health, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Emily WardInnovation, Implementation, and Clinical Translation (IIMACT) in Health, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Susan HillierInnovation, Implementation, and Clinical Translation (IIMACT) in Health, Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) have difficulties with learning and performing physical tasks. It is well known that task-specific practice is effective in improving motor skills. Additional feedback during practice may function as a quality improvement mechanism and therefore enhance motor skill outcomes. Aims: To investigate the effect of different forms of feedback on motor learning and motor performance in children with DCD. Methods: A systematic review was conducted (registration CRD42020175118) to investigate the effectiveness of different types of feedback, compared to other forms of feedback, or no additional feedback, on motor learning and motor performance outcomes in children with DCD. The search was run across six electronic databases (last search January 2024). Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion, assessed the quality of included studies, and extracted relevant data. A narrative synthesis was performed and included studies that assessed motor learning and/or performance outcomes following an intervention that delivered a specific form of feedback in comparison to another form of feedback or no specific feedback. Results: 14 articles from 13 trials were included in this review. Feedback was delivered by providing various forms of feedback, including: knowledge of results, focus of attention and augmented feedback delivered via technology. No significant differences were found between different forms of feedback for motor learning or performance outcomes for children with DCD. Interventions that used technology (with augmented feedback) to deliver the intervention were found to be as effective as traditional therapy. All groups who participated in therapy, regardless of the presence or type of feedback received, improved in overall scores on a motor performance outcome assessment. Conclusion: Despite the clear rationale for using feedback-oriented interventions for children with DCD, there is surprisingly limited and low-quality research. There is no clear evidence that one form of feedback is more effective than another, although it appears that feedback delivered via technology may be as effective as feedback delivered in traditional therapy interventions for children with DCD. Further exploration is required from appropriately powered and well-designed trials. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=175118, identifier (CRD42020175118).

Indexed as

augmented feedbackdevelopmental coordination disorder (DCD)external feedbackinternal feedbackmotor learningmotor performancetechnology

Identifiers

PMID38706921
PMCPMC11066222

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.