Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23440807›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

Educational games for health professionals.

Elie A Akl, Kay M Sackett, William S Erdley, Reem A Mustafa, Michelle Fiander, Carolynne Gabriel, Holger Schünemann

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Study Based on Gamification of Tests throughHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Elie A AklDepartment of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. ea32@aub.edu.lb.
Kay M Sackett
William S Erdley
Reem A Mustafa
Michelle Fiander
Carolynne Gabriel
Holger Schünemann
McMaster University · CAAmerican University of Beirut · LBMiddlesex London Health Unit · CAOttawa Hospital Research InstituteStone Clinic · USUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of games as an educational strategy has the potential to improve health professionals' performance (e.g. adherence to standards of care) through improving their knowledge, skills and attitudes.

objectivesThe objective was to assess the effect of educational games on health professionals' performance, knowledge, skills, attitude and satisfaction, and on patient outcomes. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the following databases in January 2012: MEDLINE, AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Database of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, EPOC Register, ERIC, Proquest Dissertations & Theses Database, and PsycINFO. Related reviews were sought in DARE and the above named databases. Database searches identified 1546 citations. We also screened the reference lists of included studies in relevant reviews, contacted authors of relevant papers and reviews, and searched ISI Web of Science for papers citing studies included in the review. These search methods identified an additional 62 unique citations for a total of 1608 for this update. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCT), controlled clinical trials (CCT), controlled before and after (CBA) and interrupted time-series analysis (ITS). Study participants were qualified health professionals or in postgraduate training. The intervention was an educational game with "a form of competitive activity or sport played according to rules". DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Using a standardized data form we extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest that included patient outcomes, professional behavior (process of care outcomes), and professional's knowledge, skills, attitude and satisfaction. MAIN

resultsThe search strategy identified a total of 2079 unique citations. Out of 84 potentially eligible citations, we included two RCTs. The game evaluated in the first study used as a reinforcement technique, was based on the television game show "Family Feud" and focused on infection control. The study did not assess any patient or process of care outcomes. The group that was randomized to the game had statistically higher scores on the knowledge test (P = 0.02). The second study compared game-based learning ("Snakes and Ladders" board game) with traditional case-based learning of stroke prevention and management. The effect on knowledge was not statistically different between the two groups immediately and 3 months after the intervention. The level of reported enjoyment was higher in the game-based group. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe findings of this systematic review neither confirm nor refute the utility of games as a teaching strategy for health professionals. There is a need for additional high-quality research to explore the impact of educational games on patient and performance outcomes.

Indexed as

Games, ExperimentalHealth PersonnelProblem SolvingProfessional CompetenceAttitude of Health PersonnelCompetitive BehaviorHumansJob SatisfactionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetention, Psychology

Identifiers

PMID23440807
OpenAlexW4211131489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.