REVIEW | doi:10.20944/preprints202301.0505.v1
Subject: Social Sciences, Education Keywords: computer thinking; game design; programming; review; robotics
Online: 27 January 2023 (12:04:52 CET)
This study presents review of 7580 papers in 13 academic journals, published from January 2015 to January 2020. After a detailed analysis of all papers, 46 papers were further selected showing research on a student population aged between 6 and 15 years old. In order for the paper to be included in the research, the condition was that the paper deals with teaching at least one of the following content areas: programming languages, game design, computer thinking (CT), algorithmic thinking and robotics programming. This study shows the representation of the listed content area in reviewed papers for the specified time period as well as a detailed analysis of the selected papers. Available data about study, participants and education level, country (first author), learning domain, teaching tools, research questions, hypothesis, pre/post-test results, interviews, control groups, course duration, research design, previous experience, project or grant and re-search purpose in detected papers were analysed. In addition, impact of studying some of the listed content areas on student learning performance, motivation, attitude and perception were investigated.
REVIEW | doi:10.20944/preprints202311.0058.v1
Subject: Public Health And Healthcare, Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy And Rehabilitation Keywords: Low back pain, SF-36, VAS, Roland-Morris, Oswestry Disability Index, Meta-analysis
Online: 1 November 2023 (23:45:33 CET)
To systematically assess the effect size of different methods for patients with low back pain. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. databases were searched in January 2023. This study has been developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement. The key search terms were: “Low back pain”, “Back pain”, “SF-36”, “VAS”, “VASP”, “Roland-Morris”, “Oswestry Disability Index”, and “conservative treatment”. The risk of bias was determined for each randomized trial using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). The outcomes included SF-36 Mental, SF-36 Physical, VAS, Roland-Morris, and Oswestry Disability Index. R 4.0.5 software was used, and standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes, random model. Twenty-five studies were included. Depending on the outcome being measured, the effect size of different methods in treating low back pain varies from small to large as follows: SF-36 Mental (SMD = 0.39, p < 0.0001), SF-36 Physical (SMD = 0.55, p < 0.0001), VAS (SMD = -0.84, p < 0.0001), Roland-Morris (SMD = -0.45, p < 0.0001), and Oswestry Disability Index (SMD = -0.61, p < 0.0001). Our meta-analysis indicates the positive effects of applying different methods in the treatment of low back pain. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022371282