Dataset Information

The role of the practice order: A systematic review about contextual interference in children.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

We aimed to identify and evaluate the quality and evidence of the motor learning literature about intervention studies regarding the contextual interference (CI) effect (blocked vs. random practice order) in children with brain lesions and typically developing (TD) children.

Method

Eight databases (Cinahl, Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Pedro, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Knowledge) were searched systematically with predefined search terms. Controlled studies examining the CI effect in children (with brain lesions or TD) were included. Evidence level, conduct quality, and risk of bias were evaluated by two authors independently. A best evidence synthesis was performed.

Results

Twenty-five papers evaluating TD children were included. One of these studies also assessed children with cerebral palsy. Evidence levels were I, II, or III. Conduct quality was low and the risk of bias high, due to methodological issues in the study designs or poor description thereof. Best evidence synthesis showed mainly no or conflicting evidence. Single tasks showed limited to moderate evidence supporting the CI effect in TD children.

Conclusion

There is a severe limitation of good-quality evidence about the CI effect in children who practice different tasks in one session, especially in children with brain lesions.

SUBMITTER: Graser JV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6342307 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The role of the practice order: A systematic review about contextual interference in children.

Graser Judith V JV Bastiaenen Caroline H G CHG van Hedel Hubertus J A HJA

PloS one 20190122 1

<h4>Aim</h4>We aimed to identify and evaluate the quality and evidence of the motor learning literature about intervention studies regarding the contextual interference (CI) effect (blocked vs. random practice order) in children with brain lesions and typically developing (TD) children.<h4>Method</h4>Eight databases (Cinahl, Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Pedro, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Knowledge) were searched systematically with predefined search terms. Controlled studies examining the CI effect ...[more]

PMID: 30668587

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIf adults practice several motor tasks together, random practice leads to better transfer and retention compared to blocked practice. Knowledge about this contextual interference (CI) effect could be valuable to improve neurorehabilitation of children. We present the protocol of a randomised controlled pilot study investigating the feasibility of blocked practice vs. random practice of robot-assisted upper limb reaching in children with brain lesions undergoing neurorehabilitation.MethodsChildren with affected upper limb function due to congenital or acquired brain lesions undergoing neurorehabilitation will be recruited for a randomised controlled pilot study with a 3-week procedure. In the control week (1), two assessment blocks (robot-assisted reaching tasks, Melbourne assessment 2, subscale fluency), 2 days apart, take place. In the practice week (2), participants are randomly allocated to blocked practice or random practice and perform 480 reaching and backward movements in the horizontal and vertical plane using exergaming with an exoskeleton robot per day during three consecutive days. Assessments are performed before, directly after and 1 day after the practice sessions. In the follow-up week (3), participants perform the assessments 1 week after the final practice session. The primary outcome is the immediate transfer of the Melbourne Assessment 2, subscale fluency. Secondary outcomes are the immediate retention, 1-day and 1-week delayed transfer and retention and acquisition during the practice sessions. We will evaluate the feasibility of the inclusion criteria, the recruitment rate, the scheduling procedure, the randomisation procedure, the procedure for the participants, the handling of the robot, the handling of the amount of data, the choice of the outcome measures and the influence of other therapies. Furthermore, we will perform a power calculation using the data to estimate the sample size for the main trial.DiscussionThe protocol of the pilot study is a first step towards a future main randomised controlled trial. This low risk pilot study might induce some benefits for the participants. However, we need to place its results into perspective, especially concerning the generalisability, as it remains questionable whether improving reaching constrained within a robotic device will ameliorate daily life reaching tasks.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02443857.

Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) applications are growing at an unprecedented pace in health care, including disease diagnosis, triage or screening, risk analysis, surgical operations, and so forth. Despite a great deal of research in the development and validation of health care AI, only few applications have been actually implemented at the frontlines of clinical practice.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to systematically review AI applications that have been implemented in real-life clinical practice.MethodsWe conducted a literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL to identify relevant articles published between January 2010 and May 2020. We also hand searched premier computer science journals and conferences as well as registered clinical trials. Studies were included if they reported AI applications that had been implemented in real-world clinical settings.ResultsWe identified 51 relevant studies that reported the implementation and evaluation of AI applications in clinical practice, of which 13 adopted a randomized controlled trial design and eight adopted an experimental design. The AI applications targeted various clinical tasks, such as screening or triage (n=16), disease diagnosis (n=16), risk analysis (n=14), and treatment (n=7). The most commonly addressed diseases and conditions were sepsis (n=6), breast cancer (n=5), diabetic retinopathy (n=4), and polyp and adenoma (n=4). Regarding the evaluation outcomes, we found that 26 studies examined the performance of AI applications in clinical settings, 33 studies examined the effect of AI applications on clinician outcomes, 14 studies examined the effect on patient outcomes, and one study examined the economic impact associated with AI implementation.ConclusionsThis review indicates that research on the clinical implementation of AI applications is still at an early stage despite the great potential. More research needs to assess the benefits and challenges associated with clinical AI applications through a more rigorous methodology.

Project description:ObjectivesShock refractory to fluid and catecholamine therapy has significant morbidity and mortality in children. The use of methylene blue to treat refractory shock in children is not well described. We aim to collect and summarize the literature and define physicians' practice patterns regarding the use of methylene blue to treat shock in children.DesignWe conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane for studies involving the use of methylene blue for catecholamine-refractory shock from database inception to 2019. Collected studies were analyzed qualitatively. To describe practice patterns of methylene blue use, we electronically distributed a survey to U.S.-based pediatric critical care physicians. We assessed physician knowledge and experience with methylene blue. Survey responses were quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated.SettingPediatric critical and cardiac care units.Patients or subjectsPatients less than or equal to 25 years old with refractory shock treated with methylene blue.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsOne-thousand two-hundred ninety-three abstracts met search criteria, 139 articles underwent full-text review, and 24 studies were included. Studies investigated refractory shock induced by a variety of etiologies and found that methylene blue was generally safe and increased mean arterial blood pressure. There is overall lack of studies, low number of study patients, and low quality of studies identified. Our survey had a 22.5% response rate, representing 125 institutions. Similar proportions of physicians reported using (40%) or never even considering (43%) methylene blue for shock. The most common reasons for not using methylene blue were unfamiliarity with this drug, its proper dosing, and lack of evidentiary support.ConclusionsMethylene blue appears safe and may benefit children with refractory shock. There is a stark divide in familiarity and practice patterns regarding its use among physicians. Studies to formally assess safety and efficacy of methylene blue in treating pediatric shock are warranted.

Project description:BackgroundFor evidence-based decision making, primary care physicians need to have specific and reliable information on the pre-test probabilities of underlying diseases and a symptom's course. We performed a systematic review of symptom-evaluating studies in primary care, following three research questions: (1) What is the prevalence of the symptom cough in children consulting primary care physicians? (2) What are the underlying aetiologies of cough and the respective frequencies? (3) What is the prognosis of children with cough?MethodsFollowing a pre-defined algorithm and independent double reviewer ratings we searched MEDLINE and EMBASE. All quantitative original research articles in English, French or German were included if they focused on unselected study populations of children consulting a primary care physician for cough. We used the random effects model for meta-analysis in subgroups, if justifiable in terms of heterogeneity.ResultsWe identified 14 eligible studies on prevalence, five on aetiology and one on prognosis. Prevalence estimates varied between 4.7 and 23.3% of all reasons for an encounter, or up to estimates of 60% when related to patients or consultations. Cough in children is more frequent than in adults, with lowest prevalences in adolescents and in summer. Acute cough is mostly caused by upper respiratory tract infections (62.4%) and bronchitis (33.3%); subacute or chronic cough by recurrent respiratory tract infection (27.7%), asthma (up to 50.4% in cough persisting more than 3 weeks), and pertussis (37.2%). Potentially serious diseases like croup, pneumonia or tuberculosis are scarce. In children with subacute and chronic cough the total duration of cough ranged from 24 to 192 days. About 62.3% of children suffering from prolonged cough are still coughing two months after the beginning of symptoms.ConclusionCough is one of the most frequent reasons for an encounter in primary care. Our findings fit in with current guideline recommendations supporting a thoughtful wait-and-see approach in acute cough and a special awareness in chronic cough of the possibility of asthma and pertussis. Further evidence of aetiological pre-test probabilities is needed to assess the diagnostic gain based on patient history and clinical signs for differential diagnoses of cough in children.

Dataset Information

The role of the practice order: A systematic review about contextual interference in children.

Aim

Method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The role of the practice order: A systematic review about contextual interference in children.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets