ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2026
Comparative effectiveness of virtual reality vs. traditional motor games on developmental functioning and motor skills in autistic children spectrum disorder: a cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a prevalent neurodevelopmental condition with progressively increasing prevalence, and traditional sports game interventions often face challenges in achieving sustained improvements in both developmental functioning and motor proficiency. Methods: This prospective cohort study compared the effects of traditional sports game interventions vs. immersive virtual reality (VR) exergaming on developmental functioning and motor skills in autistic children, and evaluated the long-term stability of outcomes. Assessments using the Gesell Developmental Schedules (GDS) and the PREFIT motor test battery were conducted at three time points: pre-intervention, immediately after the 8-week intervention, and 8 weeks after intervention cessation; both protocols were designed by a hospital-based multidisciplinary team. Results: Immersive VR exergaming demonstrated a trend toward greater improvements in most GDS subdomains and most PREFIT components compared with traditional sports game interventions, with the experimental group showing larger magnitudes of improvement during the intervention period. Scores on some PREFIT subdomains continued to increase during the 8-week follow-up period. Discussion: Due to the non-randomized design and the absence of a no-treatment control group, these findings should be interpreted as preliminary evidence. The potential advantages of immersive VR exergaming warrant further investigation through more rigorously designed randomized controlled trials.
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.