ReviewTranslational pediatrics2026
Comparative and synergistic effects of digital devices and Child Life services in pediatric clinical practice: a systematic review.
Review in Translational 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Examinations and treatments in pediatric healthcare settings may cause anxiety, fear, and psychological distress among children. Child Life services provide psychosocial support through therapeutic play, procedural preparation, and emotional support to help children cope with medical experiences. Meanwhile, digital devices, including virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), tablet-based applications, and video-based tools, have been increasingly applied to support children during healthcare procedures. However, differences in study populations, intervention designs, and outcome assessments make direct comparisons between digital devices and Child Life services difficult. This review aimed to summarize the clinical applications, reported outcomes, and potential complementary roles of these approaches in pediatric healthcare. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, VIP Database, and Wanfang Database for quantitative studies published from January 2015 to June 1, 2026. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and pre-post studies evaluating digital devices and/or Child Life interventions in pediatric healthcare settings. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) quasi-experimental assessment tool. Due to variations in study designs, intervention characteristics, and outcome measures, meta-analysis was not performed, and findings were synthesized narratively. Results: Seven RCTs were included. Digital devices used alone were associated with reduced anxiety and fear, improved behavioral responses, and increased satisfaction among children. When combined with Child Life support, digital interventions showed additional benefits, including reduced preoperative anxiety, lower caregiver anxiety, and improved cooperation during anesthesia induction. However, heterogeneity among interventions and assessment methods limited direct comparisons. Conclusions: Digital devices and Child Life services may serve complementary roles in pediatric healthcare. Digital devices mainly provide immediate support through distraction and engagement, whereas Child Life services focus on preparation, coping, and family support. Combining these approaches may offer additional support for children undergoing healthcare experiences.
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.