Trial reportBMC psychology2025
Impact of digital games on early creative expression in children: longitudinal study based on experimental intervention.
Trial report in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveExploring the impact of digital games on children's early creative expression.
method300 kids aged 4-6 were randomly divided into an experimental group (EG, n = 150) and a control group (CG, n = 150). The EG received a 16-week intervention with three types of digital games (creative painting, digital scenarios, story creation), 30 min per session, three times a week; the CG followed regular activities. Using a pre-test and post-test control group design, the pre-test measured initial creativity (drawing creation, storytelling) via the self-developed "Early Childhood Creative Expression Ability Assessment Scale" and game process observation; the post-test was conducted at the experiment's end. Quantitative data were analyzed with SPSS26.0, and qualitative data via thematic analysis.
resultsBefore intervention, there was no significant difference in creative expression or game process observation between the two groups (P > 0.05). After intervention, the EG outperformed the CG significantly in drawing innovativeness (P < 0.001), storytelling plot richness (P < 0.001), and most dimensions of drawing creative expression, storytelling multidimensionality, and game process observation (P < 0.05); the EG also showed significant pre-post improvements in all dimensions (P < 0.001), while no gender difference was found (P > 0.05).
conclusionDigital games significantly enhance children's early creative expression, providing a basis for applying digital resources in early childhood education and optimizing teaching methods to promote children's creativity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.