ArticleIndian pediatrics2026
Finger Dexterity and Pencil Grasp Patterns as Correlates of Handwriting Proficiency: A School-Based Cross-Sectional Analytical Study.
Article in Indian pediatrics, 2026. 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.
- Why Handwriting Matters.Indian pediatrics · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the association between finger dexterity and handwriting proficiency in schoolchildren, and to describe the distribution of pencil grasp patterns during a standardized copy task.
methodsThis school-based cross-sectional analytical study (June-August 2025) used complete enumeration of students in Grades 3-5. After parental consent, teachers completed the Handwriting Proficiency Screening Questionnaire (HPSQ); students performed a 2-3-line copy task in English for pencil-grasp classification and underwent O'Connor finger dexterity testing under standardized classroom conditions.
resultsAmong 500 students, 170 (34.0%) had poor handwriting (HPSQ ≥ 14). Age, grade, and sex were comparable between the poor and good handwriting groups. Dexterity was markedly worse in the poor handwriting group [O'Connor finger time (s): 388 (71.5) vs. 309.7 (59.9); P < 0.001]. Finger time moderately correlated with HPSQ scores (r = 0.466). Grasp patterns differed between groups (P < 0.001); dynamic tripod was less common in the poor handwriting group (33.5 vs. 50.0%), and non-mature grasps had higher odds of poor handwriting (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.38-2.93). Poor legibility and performance-time subscores were higher with non-mature grasps and increased with slower finger times. In multivariable analysis, slower finger dexterity and higher grade independently predicted greater difficulty.
conclusionOne-third of students had poor handwriting. Slower O'Connor finger dexterity independently predicted teacher-rated difficulty, while non-mature grasp patterns, though more prevalent in poor handwriting group, were not independently predictive. Findings support school screening that pairs HPSQ with a brief dexterity test, with interventions targeting fine motor control rather than grasp retraining.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42329351What 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.