Intervention for children with developmental coordination disorder: How robust is our recent evidence?

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of methods of intervention for children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is an ongoing process. Systematic and meta-analytical reviews play an important role in this process. Before 2015, only four reviews of this type were published on this topic. By 2019, the number had tripled, raising the question of whether the increase in quantity is accompanied by a similar increase in quality. The aim of this meta-review was to evaluate eight new review studies published during this time period with particular focus on the consistency of the inclusion criteria, the coverage of primary studies and the quality of evidence on which the conclusions were based.

METHOD

Methodological quality was evaluated using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews, Second Edition (AMSTAR 2).

RESULTS

The eight reviews differed in the inclusion criteria employed, the sources of primary evidence cited and in the quality of evidence provided. Using AMSTAR 2 terminology, the overall methodology of the reviews was judged to be acceptably high for only one. All others contained serious flaws. The conclusions drawn were not consistent.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the increase in the number of reviews on intervention for children with DCD, quality remains an issue. Persistent methodological problems mean that consumers still cannot be confident in any of the claims made for intervention effects.