ArticleDigital health
A feasibility randomised controlled trial of an exergaming device aimed at improving mobility in children with cerebral palsy.
Article in Digital health. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: A novel interactive exergaming device enables children with cerebral palsy (CP) to exercise whilst standing. A small study showed gains in ankle motion after training with the device. This study explores the feasibility of a community-based randomised controlled trial (RCT) using this device to improve mobility in children with CP (Registered ISRCTN80878394). Method: Fifteen children with CP Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels I-III were randomised 1:1 to either 10-weeks training with the device or usual care. Two potential primary outcome measures were assessed at 10-weeks with 20-week follow up: motion of the centre-of-mass estimate while stepping (Next Step) and Pediatric Balance Scale (PBS). Results: Twenty-one children were assessed for eligibility, three declined to participate, two withdrew and one did not receive the intervention but remained in follow-up. Two serious adverse events occurred (n=2). Participant recruitment was 1.2 per month, limited by device availability. Completion of PBS and Next Step was 100% and 87% at baseline, dropping to 75% and 65% respectively at 10-weeks. The intervention group showed clinically meaningful changes in median (interquartile range) PBS at 10-weeks 2.7 (1) compared to the control 1.7 (0.67). Conclusion: This study found multiple feasibility issues and further work is needed prior to implementing a RCT. There were signs of efficacy of the intervention, but findings are limited by small sample size.
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.