MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005530908 · doi:10.1089/g4h.2019.0008

Exergaming in Youth and Young Adults: A Narrative Overview

2020· review· en· W3005530908 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGames for Health Journal · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystematic reviewNarrative reviewScreen timePhysical activityBody mass indexInclusion (mineral)Sedentary behaviorGerontologyPsychologyEvidence-based practiceMEDLINEMedicinePhysical therapyAlternative medicineSocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of rapid evolution in exergaming technology and content, the literature on the benefits of exergaming needs ongoing review. Updated syntheses incorporating high-quality critical assessments of included articles can provide cutting-edge evidence to drive research and practice. The objectives were to summarize evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the association between exergaming and (1) physical activity (PA), sedentary behavior and energy expenditure (EE); and (2) body composition, body mass index (BMI), and other weight-related outcomes among persons younger than 30 years; and to summarize recommendations in the articles retained. The Elton B. Stephens Co. (ESBSCO) database for reviews was searched from January 1995 to July 2019. Data on study characteristics, findings, and recommendations for future research, game design, and intervention development were extracted from articles that met the inclusion criteria, quality scores were attributed to each article, and a narrative overview of the evidence was undertaken. Twenty-eight reviews, with 5-100 articles per review, were identified. Seventeen assessed the evidence on the association between exergaming and PA, EE, and/or sedentary behavior, and 11 examined the association with body composition, BMI, or other weight-related outcomes. There was substantial heterogeneity across reviews in objectives, definitions, and methods. A positive relationship between exergaming and EE is well documented, but whether exergaming increases PA or changes body composition is not established. The reviews retained also provide evidence that exergaming is a healthier alternative to sedentary behavior and that it can be an exciting enjoyable pastime for youth, which adds variety in PA options for health and dietary interventions. Exergaming is likely more physically health promoting than traditional videogames because of higher EE and possibly improved physical fitness and body composition. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess if exergaming reduces sedentary time, has other health benefits, or is a sustainable behavior. We recommend that exergaming interventions be designed using behavior change theory, and that future reviews use standard review criteria and include recommendations for research, game design, and intervention development.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it