ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2025
Sensory processing in Brazilian children with developmental coordination disorder, possible DCD, and typical development: a case-control study.
Article in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
Abstract
Although underexplored, the literature has suggested that children with motor difficulties experience sensory processing alterations, limiting their participation in daily activities. In that sense, investigating sensory processing in children with neurodevelopmental challenges, such as Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD), can yield valuable insights into the characteristics of this population and support decision-making by health and education professionals regarding assessment and intervention. This study compared sensory processing patterns between children with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD), possible DCD (pDCD), and typical development; and (2) examined associations between motor outcome measures and sensory processing. Caregivers of 694 children (mean age = 8.03 ± 1.43; 50.8% girls) completed the Short Sensory Profile 2 (which provides information on four sensory processing patterns: seeker, sensor, avoider, and bystander), DCD Questionnaire, and a sociodemographic questionnaire. Children's motor outcomes were assessed using the Movement Assessment Battery for Children - 2. Motor outcomes and other Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria for DCD classified children into three groups: (i) with DCD, (ii) pDCD, and (iii) typically developed. Results reveal significant differences (p < 0.001) between the groups across the four sensory processing patterns: children with DCD presented increased bystander patterns (34.6%). The sensor and bystander patterns showed a negative correlation with motor outcomes. The bystander emerged as a predictor of motor outcomes (B: -0.166 to -0.411; p < 0.001). These findings suggest that bystander sensory processing patterns may contribute to the motor difficulties observed in children with DCD, particularly in their reduced ability to perceive sensory input compared to their peers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40590984What 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.