ReviewFrontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry2026
The effectiveness of serious games for training of attention and executive functions: a systematic review.
Review in Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Evidence suggests that Serious games (SG) can be effective for improving specific neuropsychological skills. This systematic review examines the effectiveness of SGs for training attention and executive functions (EFs) in children and the degree of "far transfer" from digital training to real-world academic and behavioral outcomes. Methods: The systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (2020) guidelines on Scopus, PubMed, EBSCO, and Web of Science databases. Only studies on school-aged population with a pre- and post-training assessment of attention and EFs and with a control group were included. Results: The screening process yielded nine relevant studies. SGs improve attention and EFs, such as working memory, cognitive flexibility and inhibition in typically developing children, as well as in children with ADHD, intellectual disabilities, behavioral disorders, autism and difficulty with inhibitory control. SGs demonstrate promising improvements primarily in near-transfer. Discussion: Although the immediate benefits are evident in many cases, the transfer to untrained skills (far transfer) and the long-term effects remain limited and require further investigation. Motivation and engagement were often qualitatively inferred rather than directly measured. The effectiveness data were discussed in relation to the type of neurodevelopmental deficit.
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.