SynthesisBMC public health2025
Effects of active video games on affective responses and mental health symptoms in young adults: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundActive video games (AVGs) are increasingly recognized as a viable alternative to traditional physical activities, with growing evidence supporting their benefits for physical and mental health. This systematic review examines whether AVG interventions, compared with traditional exercise and video games, can enhance immediate affective responses (AR) and improve mental health symptoms (MHS).
methodsA systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We searched multiple electronic databases to identify studies investigating the effects of AVGs on AR and MHS in young adults. Data were extracted using a pre-designed form for synthesis.
resultsThis review included 20 RCTs (n = 1,100). Most studies (14/18) on AR found AVGs superior to control conditions in at least one measure, such as enjoyment, self-efficacy, or situational interest, though results for some outcomes were non-significant. Two studies reported null findings and two reported negative effects for AVGs. In contrast, evidence for improving MHS was limited and inconsistent, with only one out of four studies showing a significant positive effect.
conclusionPreliminary findings support a cautious optimism regarding AVGs’ ability to improve AR in young adults, with enjoyment being a key mechanism. However, evidence is currently insufficient to confirm efficacy for MHS. Strengthening this evidence base necessitates future studies that are more rigorous, target specific populations, and differentiate between AVG types. REGISTRATION: This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO, ID: CRD42024572153.
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.