Evaluating the evidence for motor-based interventions in developmental coordination disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Motor-based therapy for DCD produces large, lasting gains when you mix body-strength work with real-life tasks and participation supports.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Smits-Engelsman et al. (2018) looked at 30 studies that tested motor-based therapy for kids with developmental coordination disorder. They pulled every trial that used movement practice, games, or strength training. Then they ran a meta-analysis to see how big the gains were.
What they found
The average child in these studies jumped more than one full standard deviation on motor tests. Programs that mixed body-strength drills with real-life tasks like catching a ball gave the largest boost. Pure table-top fine-motor work helped less.
How this fits with other research
Peng et al. (2026) later added 24 newer trials and still saw big gains, so the effect is holding up over time. Izadi-Najafabadi et al. (2019) warn that gains may stay in the gym unless you also tweak the classroom: kids with DCD join games less often and get fewer tools or peer supports.
Ben-Itzchak et al. (2020) show why transfer is tricky. Their kids learned a dotted-letter trace fine, but the skill vanished when the dots disappeared. This matches the 2018 finding that table-top-only tasks yield smaller real-world change.
Kumar et al. (2025) add a quality-of-life lens. Parents report wider social and school struggles than their children admit. Pair motor drills with participation goals and ask both the child and the parent how life is going.
Why it matters
You now have solid numbers to tell funders why movement therapy belongs in the plan. Pick programs that blend strength or balance games with daily tasks like handwriting or playground rules. Track participation, not just test scores, and add environmental tweaks so the new skill survives outside the clinic.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add one playground-level objective to the current motor goal and list peer or teacher supports needed for transfer.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: As part of the process of creating an update of the clinical practice guidelines for developmental coordination disorder (DCD) (Blank, Smits-Engelsman, Polatajko, & Wilson, 2012), a systematic review of intervention studies, published since the last guidelines statement was conducted. AIM: The aim of this study was to 1) systematically review the evidence published from January 2012 to February 2017 regarding the effectiveness of motor based interventions in individuals with DCD, 2) quantify treatment effects using a meta-analysis, 3) examine the available information on different aspects of delivery including use of group intervention, duration and frequency of therapy, and 4) identify gaps in the literature and make recommendations for future intervention research. METHOD: An electronic search of 5 databases (PubMed, Embase, Pedro, Scopus and Cochrane) was conducted for studies that evaluated motor-based interventions to improve performance for individuals with DCD. RESULTS: Thirty studies covering 25 datasets were included, 19 of which provided outcomes on standardized measures of motor performance. The overall effect size (Cohen's d) across intervention studies was large (1.06), but the range was wide: for 11 interventions, the observed effect was large (>0.80), in eight studies moderate (>0.50), and in five it was small or negligible (<0.50). Positive benefits were evident for activity-oriented approaches, body function-oriented combined with activities, active video games, and small group programs. CONCLUSION: Results showed that activity-oriented and body function oriented interventions can have a positive effect on motor function and skills. However, given the varied methodological quality and the large confidence intervals of some studies, the results should be interpreted with caution.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2018 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2018.01.002