ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Effectiveness and acceptability of exergaming in people with mild cognitive impairment: protocol for an overview of systematic reviews and network meta-analysis.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionExergaming shows great potential in the intervention of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, further research is needed on the use of exergaming in people with MCI. The current evidence of the use of exergaming in MCI has conflicting results. Which kind of exergaming is the most effective is uncertain. There is no overview of systematic reviews of exergaming in MCI, which makes the quality of the methods used for these systematic reviews unclear. The acceptability of the application of exergaming in people with MCI is uncertain. Therefore, this study will explore the effectiveness and acceptability of exergaming in MCI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An overview of systematic reviews will be conducted according to the general principles of systematic reviewing methodology. A network meta-analysis will be conducted to compare the effectiveness of different exergames. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist has been completed. We will retrieve systematic reviews or meta-analysis from six databases from inception to January 2025. A list of included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be retrieved from eligible systematic reviews. AMSTAR 2 will be used for methodological quality assessment. Methodological quality assessment of the included RCTs will be performed using "the Version 2 of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in RCTs" (RoB 2). We will use the PRISMA statement to report quality evaluation. The certainty of evidence that contributes to network estimation will be assessed through the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Effectiveness and acceptability will be measured by standardized mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). In this study, we will adhere to established methods for conducting pairwise meta-analyses, followed by a network meta-analysis. Data analysis will be performed using Stata version 14.1.
resultsThe results of this study will provide a comprehensive synthesis of evidence regarding the effectiveness and acceptability of exergaming in people with mild cognitive impairment.
conclusionThe conclusions of this study will provide evidence-based recommendations to guide the implementation of exergaming interventions for individuals with mild cognitive impairment and provide valuable insights for guidelines and future research in this field. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023421052.
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.