Exercise trials favored inhibitory-control scores in autistic children
A meta-analysis favored exercise on a specific cognitive outcome, but does not establish which activity works best or whether benefits carry into everyday life.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
The pooled results favored exercise for inhibitory control, a skill involved in regulating behavior. The abstract also reports larger estimates for some structured activities, but those estimates do not establish that one activity is superior. It provides no direct evidence that the score changes improved social interaction or daily functioning.
The review included quasi-randomized as well as randomized trials. This abstract-based account lacks study-level risk-of-bias findings and follow-up details, limiting judgments about reliability and whether any improvement persisted.
Understanding the score difference
The pooled advantage was 0.66 standard deviations (95% confidence interval 0.44–0.88). These units describe score variability, not raw test points or percentage improvement. Positive values favored exercise; the abstract does not specify control conditions or assessment timing.
Subgroup findings need care
Across studies, longer total training duration was associated with larger effects, which does not establish a preferred schedule. The age association was not statistically significant, so the abstract does not demonstrate greater benefit in younger children.
The original publication
Multilevel meta-analysis of the effect of exercise intervention on inhibitory control in children with ASD.
Song X, Hou Y, Lei Z et al.
Front Psychol · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 41143048
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.