Evidence mapPaperPMID 40966596Full record

ReviewJMIR serious games2025

Effectiveness of Gamification Interventions to Improve Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior in Children and Adolescents: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Min Wang, Jisheng Xu, Xulin Zhou, Xingchen Li, Yu Zheng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR serious games, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Min WangSchool of Economics and Management, Chengdu Sport University, 1942 Huanhu North Road, Eastern New Area, Chengdu, 641418, China, 86 18980061501.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-9305-2484
Jisheng XuSchool of Sports Medicine and Health, Chengdu Sport University, Chengdu, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5704-968X
Xulin ZhouSchool of Sports Medicine and Health, Chengdu Sport University, Chengdu, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-2228-4576
Xingchen LiSchool of Physical Education, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-5492-8425
Yu ZhengSchool of Economics and Management, Chengdu Sport University, 1942 Huanhu North Road, Eastern New Area, Chengdu, 641418, China, 86 18980061501.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-9169-6105

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

behavior changeeHealthgamificationhealth behaviorinterventionmeta-analysismobile phonephysical activityPRISMAsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40966596
PMCPMC12445784

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.