Understanding why an active video game intervention did not improve motor skill and physical activity in children with developmental coordination disorder: A quantity or quality issue?
Hitting minute goals is not enough—poor game quality sinks AVG interventions for kids with DCD.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers sent active video games home with kids who have developmental coordination disorder. Parents logged how long the kids played each day.
The team later asked why the games did not boost motor skills or daily activity. They looked at game choice, difficulty, boredom, and tech glitches.
What they found
Kids hit the minute goal on most days. Yet the games still failed to help skills or fitness.
The reason was poor play quality. Wrong game level, broken controllers, and 'this is boring' killed the benefit.
How this fits with other research
Lin et al. (2015) ran a similar motion game but built it in Scratch with exact difficulty control. Three kids gained strength in an ABAB design. The 2017 AVG failed because it lacked that tight quality check.
Ren et al. (2023) pooled 23 digital-game studies and found moderate cognitive gains when both task content and game features were tuned together. Their meta-analysis now includes the 2017 null case as a lesson on what happens when tuning is ignored.
Lee et al. (2022) also saw no extra activity after a six-month home program in teens with IDD. Both studies show that sending equipment home without live quality control often ends in a flat line, even if goals are met on paper.
Anonymous (2025) fixed the problem. They used a WISH→WON training script inside PE class. Kids with mild ID mastered VR exergames in 16 sessions. Live coaching plus prompt fading succeeded where the 2017 parent-only model stalled.
Why it matters
BCBAs writing AVG prescriptions now have a checklist: calibrate difficulty each session, swap games before boredom hits, test controllers weekly, and embed brief BST for parents or staff. Without these steps, minute goals are just numbers on a log.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Start each AVG session with a 2-minute difficulty check: watch the child play, drop or raise the level until you see fluent movement plus a smile.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Active video games (AVGs) have been identified as a novel strategy to improve motor skill and physical activity in clinical populations. A recent cross-over randomized trial found AVGs to be ineffective at improving motor skill and physical activity in the home-environment for children with or at-risk for developmental coordination disorder (DCD). AIMS: The study purpose was to better understand why the intervention had been ineffective by examining the quantity and quality of AVG play during an AVG intervention for children with or at-risk for DCD. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Participants (n=21, ages 9-12) completed the 16 week AVG intervention. Detailed quantitative and qualitative data were systematically triangulated to obtain the quantity of exposure (AVG exposure over time, patterns of exposure) and quality of use (game selection, facilitators and barriers to play). OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The median AVG dose (range 30-35min/day) remained relatively stable across the intervention and met the prescribed dose. Play quality was impacted by game selection, difficulty playing games, lack of time, illness, technical difficulties and boredom. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The ineffectiveness of a home-based AVG intervention may be due to quality of play. Strategies to improve the quality of game play may help realize the potential benefits of AVGs as a clinical tool for children with DCD.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2017 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2016.10.013