Improving Reading Through Videogames and Digital Apps: A Systematic Review
Fecha
2021Autor
Ostiz-Blanco, Mikel
Bernacer, Javier
Garcia-Arbizu, Irati
Diaz-Sanchez, Patricia
Rello, Luz
Lallier, Marie
Arrondo, Gonzalo
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítem
Ostiz-Blanco M, Bernacer J, Garcia-Arbizu I, Diaz-Sanchez P, Rello L, Lallier M and Arrondo G (2021) Improving Reading Through Videogames and Digital Apps: A Systematic Review. Front. Psychol. 12:652948. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652948
Resumen
Background: The use of electronic interventions to improve reading is becoming a
common resource. This systematic review aims to describe the main characteristics of
randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies that have used these tools
to improve first-language reading, in order to highlight the features of the most reliable
studies and guide future research.
Methods: The whole procedure followed the PRISMA guidelines, and the protocol
was registered before starting the process (doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CKM4N). Searches
in Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and an institutional reference aggregator (Unika)
yielded 6,230 candidate articles. After duplicate removal, screening, and compliance of
eligibility criteria, 55 studies were finally included.
Results: They were research studies on improving first-language reading, both in
children and adults, and including a control group. Thirty-three different electronic tools
were employed, most of them in English, and studies were very diverse in sample size,
length of intervention, and control tasks. Risk of bias was analyzed with the PEDro
scale, and all studies had a medium or low risk. However, risk of bias due to conflicts of
interest could not be evaluated in most studies, since they did not include a statement
on this issue.
Conclusion: Future research on this topic should include randomized intervention and
control groups, with sample sizes over 65 per group, interventions longer than 15 h, and
a proper disclosure of possible conflicts of interest.
Systematic Review Registration: The whole procedure followed the PRISMA
guidelines, and the protocol was registered before starting the process in the Open
Science Framework (doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CKM4N).