SynthesisScientific reports2026
Effects of immersive training on motor competence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) immersive training have gained attention for enhancing motor skills and rehabilitation, yet evidence on their effects in specific motor competence domains remains inconsistent due to outcome heterogeneity. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the impact of immersive AR and/or VR training on domain-specific motor competence (stability and functional mobility; object control and visuomotor skills) in healthy individuals and athletes. We searched Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, CNKI, and EBSCO from inception to October 2025 for randomized controlled trials and controlled intervention studies comparing immersive AR and/or VR training with conventional training or no-intervention controls. The review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251238825). Eligible studies involved healthy or athletic participants reporting motor performance outcomes, classified into domain-specific constructs: stability and functional mobility (e.g., locomotor skills/mobility, postural stability) and object control and visuomotor skills (e.g., complex sport-specific skills, fundamental visuomotor abilities). These domains were further grouped by skill type, predominantly closed skills (predictable environments) versus open skills (unpredictable, dynamic environments). A random-effects model was used to compute standardized mean differences (SMD; Hedges' g), with heterogeneity assessed via I
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.