Effectiveness of Gamification Interventions to Improve Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior in Children and Adolescents: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Physical activity (PA) is critically linked to the health outcomes of children and adolescents. Gamification interventions represent a promising approach to promote PA engagement. However, the effects of these interventions on both PA and sedentary behavior (SB) in this population remain controversial. This review seeks to clarify this controversy. Objective: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of gamification interventions in enhancing PA and reducing SB in children and adolescents, while identifying potential moderators for PA promotion. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1, 2010, and August 1, 2024. Included RCTs examined gamification interventions targeting PA, SB, daily step counts, and BMI in children and adolescents. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4 (Cochrane) and Stata 18.0 (StataCorp), with subgroup analyses assessing moderating effects of theoretical paradigms, game elements, and intervention duration. Methodological robustness was evaluated via the Egger regression test, sensitivity analyses (leave-one-out method), and funnel plot inspection for publication bias. Results: A total of 16 RCTs involving 7472 children and adolescents (age range 6-18 y) were included. Our findings showed that the gamification interventions significantly increased moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA; standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.29; P=.04) and reduced BMI (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18; P<.001). However, there was no significant improvement in SB (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.22; P=.33), vigorous physical activity (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.55; P=.56), moderate physical activity (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.53; P=.38), light physical activity (SMD -0.00, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.48; P>.99), and daily step count (SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.94; P=.55). Subgroup analyses revealed significant moderation effects for MVPA improvement by theoretical paradigm, game elements, intervention duration, and study setting. Conclusions: This meta-analysis confirms that gamification interventions effectively increased MVPA in children and adolescents, with sustained effects persisting beyond follow-up. The efficacy of these interventions is significantly moderated by theoretical paradigms, game elements, and intervention duration. However, blinding infeasibility contributed to prevalent performance bias, potentially introducing detection bias for subjective SB and PA metrics. Future research should strengthen blinding protocols for outcome assessors, enhance allocation concealment reporting, and validate conclusions through high-quality RCTs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».