Effects of a Session of Exergames and Traditional Games on Inhibitory Control in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is characterized by deficits in executive functions, such as inhibitory control, which affect behavior and social adaptation. Although physical activity-based interventions, such as exergames, have shown potential to improve these functions, their comparative effects with active traditional games remain underexplored, particularly regarding inhibitory control in children with ASD. Objective: We aim to analyze the effects of a session of exergames and active traditional games on inhibitory control in children with ASD. Methods: This randomized controlled crossover trial included 9 male children with ASD (mean age 8.6, SD 1.4 y). Participants completed three 20-minute experimental sessions in random order, with a minimum interval of 48 hours: (1) active traditional games, (2) exergames using Just Dance 2022, and (3) a control session with manual painting activities. Inhibitory control was assessed 5 minutes postsession using a modified flanker task in the E-Prime (version 3.0; Psychological Software Tools Inc) program, recording reaction time (RT) and accuracy in congruent and incongruent phases. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare RT and accuracy between experimental and control conditions. Data are presented as means and 95% CIs. Results: There was a statistically significant effect of condition on RT in the incongruent phase (P=.02). RT in the exergame session (849 ms, 95% CI 642 to 1057) was lower compared to the traditional games (938 ms, 95% CI 684 to 1191; P=.02) and control (969 ms, 95% CI 742, 1196 to P=.01) sessions. No significant differences were observed in RT during the congruent phase or in accuracy across either phase. Conclusions: A 20-minute session of exergame improved inhibitory control performance in children with ASD compared to active traditional games and painting activities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".