Table 2.

Characteristics of the included studies (methodology and outcome).

Study	Methodology		Outcome
	Study designa	Duration	Measurement	Effect
Agmon et al [38]	Within-group, poststudy interview	3 sessions per week; 12 weeks	Socialization: semistructured interview	Six out of 7 participants described that they enjoyed playing Wii Fit with their grandchildren
Chao et al [21]	Within-group, poststudy interview	2 sessions per week; 12 weeks	Social connection: semistructured interviews	The program encouraged participants to get connected with others
Jung et al [39]	Between-group, 2 conditions: Playing exergames (N=30) Playing traditional board games (N=15)	3 sessions per week; 6 weeks	Loneliness: UCLAb Loneliness Scale	Exergame group versus control group: t43=5.34, P<.01
Kahlbaugh et al [40]	Between-group, 3 conditions: Playing exergames with a partner (N=16) Watching television programs with a partner (N=12) No visits (N=7)	1 session per week; 10 weeks	Loneliness: UCLA Loneliness Scale	Exergame group versus television group: F2,30=6.24, P<.005
Keogh et al [41]	Within-group, poststudy interview	8 weeks	Socialization: semistructured group interview	“Several (P5 and P4) found that having a ‘new face’ to interact with and someone who would sit and listen was something to look forward to.”
Millington [42]	Within-group, poststudy interview	Wii constant use at one center; 1 to 2 times per month for another two centers	Social engagement: Interview	“Virtual bowling can bring people together in communal spaces while also ‘getting them up’ and active”
Theng et al [43]	Within-group, pre- and poststudy measurement	6 sessions	Positive attitude: semantic differential scale	Mean positive attitude towards youth: increased from 4.06 (SD 0.78) to 4.27 (SD 0.43)
Wollersheim et al [44]	Poststudy focus group discussion	2 sessions per week; 6 weeks	Social bonding: focus group discussion	“Many of the women noted that being more technologically adept allowed them to be more connected to their grandchildren.”
Wu et al [45]	Between-group, 4 conditions: Playing collaborative exergame (N=26) Playing competitive exergame (N=24) Playing collaborative traditional exercise (N=25) Playing competitive traditional exercise (N=20)	2 sessions per week; 4 weeks	Social presence: The Social Presence in Gaming questionnaire	Exergame group versus traditional exercise group: beta=–.20, P<.10 (in general intention model)
Xu et al [22]	Between-group, 3 conditions: Playing exergames with their peers (N=31) Playing with an adolescent (N=26) Playing alone (N=31)	3 sessions per week; 1 week	3 measurements: Loneliness: UCLA Loneliness Scale Social anxiousness: the interaction anxiousness scale Sociability: sociability scale	3 effects: Loneliness: significantly decreased after playing exergames, F1,83=.57, P<.05 Social anxiousness: did not change significantly, F1,83=1.58, P=.212 Sociability: significantly increased after playing exergames, F1,83=3.95, P=.050

^aFor social outcomes.

^bUCLA: University of California, Los Angeles.