ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Evaluation of Reaction Time and Hand-Eye Coordination in Schoolchildren Using Wearable Sensor-Based Systems: A Study with Neural Trainer Devices.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reaction time and hand-eye coordination are critical neuromotor skills in school-aged children, influencing academic, cognitive, and motor development. The objective of this study was to evaluate schoolchildren's performance on reaction time tests using Neural Trainer device sensors and wearable technology, establishing baseline metrics and identifying lateral performance asymmetries. Fifty-nine schoolchildren performed six sensor-based motor tests involving bimanual and unimanual interaction: P1 (10 timed repetitions, bimanual), P2 (10 timed repetitions, left hand), P3 (10 timed repetitions, right hand), P4 (hits, bimanual), P5 (hits, left hand), and P6 (hits, right hand). Neural Trainer devices with four light nodes were used for activity monitoring. Data was analyzed using statistical methods to assess time, accuracy, and variability. The results showed that the average times were P1 = 8.69 ± 1.44 s, P2 = 8.90 ± 1.30 s, and P3 = 8.83 ± 1.29 s. The average successes were P4 = 22.90 ± 3.10, P5 = 22.00 ± 3.40, and P6 = 24.42 ± 2.72 hits. Significant differences were found between hands in successes (
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.