ReviewFrontiers in psychology2026
The relationship between motor skills and social development in 6-12 years old typically developing children: a systematic review.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Motor skill development plays a pivotal role in children's holistic development, including both physical fitness and social competence. This systematic review examined the specific relationships between motor skill components (gross and fine motor skills) and three core domains of social development (social cognition, social emotion, and social behavior) in typically developing children aged 6-12 years. Methods: We conducted a systematic search across eight databases (Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCOhost, PubMed, ScienceDirect, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP) from inception through April 2026. After initial title/abstract screening, full texts were reviewed against inclusion criteria. Two researchers independently performed study selection and quality assessment, with a third researcher resolving discrepancies. Results: From 8,252 initially identified records, 22 studies met inclusion criteria. Analysis revealed: (1) overall motor skills showed weak-to-moderate positive correlations (r = 0.008-0.549) with social development; (2) gross motor skills demonstrated stronger associations (weak-to-strong; r = 0.198-0.762) than fine motor skills (weak-to-moderate; r = 0.060-0.534); (3) research focus was unevenly distributed, with self-perception being most studied (59.1%), followed by peer relationships, problematic behaviors, and negative emotions (18.2% each), adaptive behaviors (13.6%), and emotion recognition (4.5%). Conclusion: Findings suggest that motor skills are consistently associated with social development outcomes, with particularly strong evidence for gross motor skills. Future research should investigate underlying mechanisms and long-term effects through longitudinal designs. Systematic review registration: The complete registration record is available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025645601. This systematic review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO on February, 2025 under the registration number CRD42025645601.
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.