Interactive Digital Game for Improving Visual–Perceptual Defects in Children With a Developmental Disability: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visual-perceptual defects in children can negatively affect their ability to perform activities of daily living. Conventional rehabilitation training for correcting visual-perceptual defects has limited training patterns and limited interactivity, which makes motivation difficult to sustain. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop and evaluate an interactive digital game system for correcting visual-perceptual defects and evaluate its effectiveness. METHODS: Participants were children aged 5 to 10 years with a diagnosis of visual-perceptual defect associated with a developmental disability. The children were randomized into a digital game group who received the traditional course of rehabilitation combined with an interactive digital game intervention (n=12) and a standard rehabilitation group (n=11) who only received the traditional course of rehabilitation. Each group underwent rehabilitation once a week for 4 weeks. Overall improvement in Test of Visual Perceptual Skills 3rd edition (TVPS-3) score and overall improvement in performance in the interactive digital game were evaluated. Parents and therapists were asked to complete a satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: After 4 weeks, the TVPS-3 score had significantly increased (P=.002) in the digital game group (pre: mean 41.67, SD 13.88; post: 61.50, SD 21.64). In the standard rehabilitation group, the TVPS-3 score also increased, but the increase was not statistically significant (P=.58). Additionally, TVPS-3 score increases were significantly larger for the digital game group compared with those for the standard rehabilitation group (P=.005). Moreover, both parents and therapists were highly satisfied with the system. All 5 themes of satisfaction had mean scores higher than 4 in a 5-point scale questionnaire (mean 4.30, SD 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: The system has potential applications for improving visual-perceptual function in children undergoing medical rehabilitation for developmental disability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05016492; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05016492.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".