SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Systematic review of sensory-based interventions for children and youth (2015-2024).
Synthesis in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sensory Integration Therapy for Preschool Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Co-Occurring Intellectual Disability: An Exploratory Single-Group Pre-Post Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The role of sensory experience in the maturation of prefrontal cortical circuits.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Children with developmental disorders often benefit from interventions supporting participation, including sensory interventions, which should be grounded and informed by evidence. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate and summarize current evidence on the effectiveness of sensory-based interventions (SBIs) on functional outcomes to guide interventions. Methods: Searches were performed in Medline (OVID), CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO, OTSeeker, Cochrane Reviews, and ERIC. Inclusion criteria included the following: published in English between May 2015 and January 2024; participants aged 0-21 years with sensory integration/processing challenges; level I and II studies as classified by Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model; functional outcomes indicated. The review followed the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Results: Twenty-one studies were included. Strong strength of evidence supported use of deep pressure tactile input and caregiver training on the use of sensory strategies. Moderate strength of evidence supported that alternative seating did not improve attention. Additionally moderate strength of evidence supported targeting a variety of sensory systems is more effective than targeting only one system. There is a lack of evidence on the impact of sensory environmental modifications. Discussion: SBIs may be useful for improving functional outcomes and participation. Further research is needed to clarify effectiveness for specific outcomes.
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.