Interventions for children with developmental coordination disorder: A scoping review.
Dorothee Jelsma, Zdenek Svoboda, Reza Abdollahipour and 7 others
PMID 41746944WHAT IT FOUND
Most interventions for children with coordination difficulties reported improved motor performance, but few measured real-life participation or social impact.
Delivery in groups, schools, or one-to-one sessions all showed benefits, though diagnostic criteria were often poorly reported.
Key findings
01A majority of studies reported significant improvements in motor performance after intervention, with 61.9% of DCD studies and 77.0% of suspected DCD studies showing beneficial changes.
02Interventions were delivered in large groups, small groups, and individual sessions, with all formats showing significant benefits on several outcome measures.
03Few studies fully applied all four DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Developmental Coordination Disorder, with only 10.4% of studies reporting all criteria.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 10.4% of included studies reported all four DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for DCD, making it difficult to compare results across studies. The review did not assess the quality of individual studies or calculate effect sizes, relying instead on whether authors reported significant changes. Most interventions targeted body functions (movement) rather than participation (daily life activities), limiting understanding of real-world impact. No studies included participants aged 15 to 25, leaving adolescents and young adults unrepresented. Dosage and delivery details were often poorly reported, hindering replication.
Declared interests
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. The work was funded by the Czech Science Foundation.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the high rate of significant motor performance improvements as evidence that specific interventions are superior or effective for all children with DCD. The review did not compare effectiveness between intervention types, and diagnostic criteria were inconsistently applied, meaning the populations studied may not be comparable.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →