ReviewBrain sciences2026
Action Observation and Motor Imagery in Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder: A Systematic Review.
Review in Brain sciences, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesChildren with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) show substantial motor and balance difficulties that affect daily activities. Although action observation (AO) and motor imagery (MI) are effective in other neurological conditions, their impact in DCD remains underinvestigated. This review explores the preliminary evidence of AO- and MI-based interventions for improving motor and functional outcomes in children with DCD.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science identified randomized controlled trials and controlled trials published in the last 15 years evaluating AO and MI interventions in children with DCD. Two independent reviewers conducted the screening of the studies, data extraction, and the risk-of-bias assessment using RoB2 and ROBINS-I. The review followed PRISMA reporting guidelines and was pre-registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD420251084196).
resultsOf 320 records initially identified, seven studies, involving 199 children with DCD (aged 5-12 years), were included. Interventions varied from single-session to multi-session protocols (1-16 sessions) and included AO, MI, or a combination of both (AO + MI), with heterogeneous control conditions. Within these studies, the outcomes were primarily assessed using standardized motor coordination measures (MABC/MABC-2, DCDQ), planning tasks, and performance-based activities of daily living (ADLs) measures. Improvements were reported in motor imagery tasks, planning, and functional task performance. However, RCTs and CTs were identified to have a moderate and high risk of bias, respectively.
conclusionsThe present review suggests that AO and MI, either alone or in combination, may enhance motor planning, coordination, and daily functional skills in children with DCD, supporting internal motor representations and predictive motor control, reflecting functional gain in motor skills and ADL performance. Interestingly, these mental training approaches can be applied in clinical and everyday settings and are suitable for supporting these processes, with VR-based combinations representing a promising, but exploratory, approach. Although critical heterogeneity and a moderate risk of bias remain, the findings need to be interpreted with caution and require further investigation.
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.