The Effect of Literacy Learning via Mobile Augmented Reality for the Students with ADHD and Reading Disabilities

What is the level of evidence for the use of currently available technologies in facilitating the self-management of difficulties associated with ADHD in children and young people? A systematic review

“…Of the fourteen included studies in this review, the interventions assessed include two tablet devices [59,60] two mobile applications [58,62], the use of a Wii remote control [61], computer software [51, 54] and computer games [34,52,53,[55][56][57]63]. Following exclusions, outcome measure assessment (Appendix 5) and quality assessment of the fourteen included studies was conducted (appendices 3 and 4).…”

“…Two of the unincluded papers presented in this meta analysis [29] did not report technological interventions [65,66], one did not use validated outcome measures of ADHD-related difficulties [67], four reported Table 5 non-RCT risk of bias summary [62]. Statistical significance was not observed for the quality of life [55] or selfefficacy [34] measures which interestingly, only featured in two of the included RCTs [34,55].…”

“…Overall, the included non-RCTs obtained low scores on the Downs and Black scale. Out of a maximum score of 32, two studies scored eleven [59,60], three scored nine [61][62][63] and one obtained a score of six [58]. A number of conclusions could be drawn from this including low sample sizes and the non-RCT nature of the studies (thus obtaining low scores on items that assess whether or not participants and research staff are blinded).…”

“…Of the fourteen included studies in this review, five [34,52,53,56,57] aggregated data with ordinal scales, four used no formal statistical analysis [58][59][60]63] and two carried out statistical analysis when their sample sizes only consisted of two participants each [61,62]. Clinimetric properties were not described for any of the primary outcome measures of this review.…”

“…Twelve of the included studies [34,51,[53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62] used scales of measurement that did not have established psychometric properties. Four of the fourteen studies [58][59][60]63] did not perform any formal statistical analysis.…”