SynthesisBrazilian journal of physical therapy
Effectiveness of exercise interventions to improve motor coordination and manual dexterity of deaf children: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of exercise interventions to improve motor coordination and manual dexterity of deaf children: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Brazilian journal of physical therapyPooled it
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVestibular disorders are frequent findings in children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), impairing the sensory regulation of postural control, and the spatiotemporal relationship, and triggering disturbances in balance, motor coordination, and gross and fine motor skills in these children.
objectiveTo assess the certainty of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used exercise interventions to improve motor coordination and manual dexterity of children and/or adolescents with SNHL.
methodsThis systematic review searched for articles on the topic in 10 electronic databases: MEDLINE/Pubmed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, LILACS, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), PEDro, SciELO and the Google Scholar. There was no restriction on publication time or languages for the selection of articles, and the last search took place on March 1, 2025. RCTs were included, with children and/or adolescents, diagnosed with bilateral SNHL in the age group between 6-19 years old, without physical, cognitive, and/or neurological problems, except vestibular dysfunction, and who used exercise interventions to improve motor coordination and manual dexterity. Three independent reviewers performed the extraction of trials, data, assessment of risk of bias, and certainty of evidence. The presence of risk of bias in RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
resultsEleven RCTs were included in this review with a total of 475 volunteers. Five RCTs were included in the meta-analyses. One of the meta-analyses showed that practicing 18 weeks of exercise improved the general motor coefficient score of the Körperkoordinationstest für Kinder test by 9.08 more in children with SNHL, compared to those who did not exercise: (9.08 [CI:5.78, 12.3], I² = 63 %), based on low certainty evidence. Another meta-analysis observed that practicing exercise for 7 weeks improved the balance of children with SNHL by 6.69 more in the balance subtest of the Bruininks-Oseretsky test of Motor Proficiency, compared to children who did not exercise: (6.69 [CI:4.10, 9.28], I
conclusionExercise interventions were effective in improving motor coordination and manual dexterity of children with SNHL. However, these findings are not consistent, as they are based on evidence of low or very low certainty. Due to the limitations and biases present in the RCTs analyzed, it is suggested that new RCTs on the topic be performed with greater methodological rigor, to encourage and guide clinical practice on the topic, based on high-certainty evidence.
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.