SynthesisFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Serious gaming and eye-tracking for the screening, monitoring, and diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders in children: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07702526 (Effects of an Eye-Movement Intervention on Cognitive Impairment in Individuals Across Illness Stages of Schizophrenia), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 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.
Effects of an Eye-Movement Intervention on Cognitive Impairment in Individuals Across Illness Stages of Schizophrenia: Protocol for a Stratified Randomized, Active-Controlled, Assessor-Blinded Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Blockchain-enabled digital twin systems in healthcare: a systematic scoping review of architectural integration, privacy, governance, ethical challenges, and regulatory solutions under GDPR and HIPAA.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- A visualization tool for eye tracking time series analysis supporting teachers and psychologists.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurological development between the ages of 3-11 is crucial to the shaping of infrastructural capabilities like the executive functions that enable the child to achieve academically and socially. Such development can be hindered by neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Dyslexia, and Dysgraphia, which affect 5%-10% of the world population of children. Although the importance of early screening is acknowledged, inadequacies such as access barriers, long waiting time, and excessive cost lead to late detection, even when potential issues are identified. This PRISMA-based systematic review examines the role of technology and serious games that may screen and monitor NDDs in children early. The PubMed and Scopus databases were utilized, and research published between 2013, and February of 2025 was reviewed, where the age interval of the sampled children was between 3 and 11, and extended to 21 in relevant cases. Some of the tools reviewed are eye-tracking systems, machine learning models, mobile applications, and serious games. The quality of studies was assessed by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and the results synthesized narratively. Out of 3,129 records, 37 studies were included according to the inclusion criteria. Findings indicated that although numerous technologies showed promise in recognizing and assisting children with NDDs, the majority had limited capabilities in scalability, longitudinal tracking, and practical application as the following was minimal, and the length of follow-up was low. In summary, the possibilities of using technology to better diagnose and intervene early are promising, although cost, training and implementation frameworks aligned with the NHS are critical barriers.
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.