Back

Can You Beat the Music? Validation of a Gamified Rhythmic Training in Children with ADHD

Jamey, K.; Laflamme, H.; Foster, N. E. V.; Rigoulot, S.; Kotz, S. A.; Dalla Bella, S.

2024-03-25 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2024.03.19.24304539 medRxiv
Show abstract

Neurodevelopmental disorders like ADHD can affect rhythm perception and production, impacting the performance in attention and sensorimotor tasks. Improving rhythmic abilities through targeted training might compensate for these cognitive functions. We introduce a novel protocol for training rhythmic skills via a tablet-based serious game called Rhythm Workers (RW). This proof-of-concept study tested the feasibility of using RW in children with ADHD. We administered an at-home longitudinal protocol across Canada. A total of 27 children (7-13 years) were randomly assigned to either a finger-tapping rhythmic game (RW) or a control game with comparable auditory-motor demands but without beat-synchronization (active control condition). Participants played the game for 300 minutes over two weeks. We collected data (self-reported and logged onto the device) on game compliance and acceptance. Further, we measured rhythmic abilities using the Battery for the Assessment of Auditory Sensorimotor and Timing Abilities (BAASTA). The current findings show that both games were equally played in duration, rated similarly for overall enjoyment, and relied on similar motor activity (finger taps). The children who played RW showed improved general rhythmic abilities compared to controls; these improvements were also positively related to the playing duration. We also present preliminary evidence that executive functioning improved in those who played RW but not controls. These findings indicate that both games are well-matched. RW demonstrates efficacy in enhancing sensorimotor skills in children with ADHD, potentially benefiting executive functioning. A future RCT with extended training and sample size could further validate these skill transfer effects.

Published in Behavior Research Methods (predicted rank #9) · training set

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.