Table 1_Process-based digital assessment of children’s handwriting: a scoping review of graphomotor, orthographic, and educational indicators.xlsx

Position or trajectory (145, 91.8%) and time or timestamps (124, 78.5%) were the most common raw signals, followed by pen pressure or normal force (82, 51.9%) and pen-state or in-air information (71, 44.9%). Common derived feature families included speed or velocity (97, 61.4%), temporal or duration measures (84, 53.2%), spatial or geometric measures (67, 42.4%), and pressure- or force-derived measures (59, 37.3%). Developmental or normative characterization (75, 47.5%) and clinical characterization or differential assessment (74, 46.8%) were the most frequent applications.

Latin-alphabetic handwriting appeared in 114 reports (72.2%), followed by Hebrew (23, 14.6%), Chinese (19, 12.0%), and Arabic (5, 3.2%).</p>Conclusions<p>Digital handwriting assessment is well established in process capture but less consistently translated into applied educational or clinical decisions. Classification performance should not be equated with diagnostic validity. A theory-informed and review-refined four-level framework organizes raw signals, derived features, assessment constructs, and empirical interpretation or action without implying a validated developmental or psychometric hierarchy.</p>