Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27777755›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2016

Serious electronic games as behavioural change interventions in healthcare-associated infections and infection prevention and control: a scoping review of the literature and future directions.

Enrique Castro-Sánchez, Yiannis Kyratsis, Michiyo Iwami, Timothy M Rawson, Alison H Holmes

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Enrique Castro-SánchezNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infection & Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3351-9496
Yiannis KyratsisHealth Services Research & Management Division, School of Health Sciences, City University London, London, UK.
Michiyo IwamiNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infection & Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Timothy M RawsonNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infection & Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Alison H HolmesNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infection & Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBCity, University of London · GB

Funding

Department of Health II-LA-0214-20008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe uptake of improvement initiatives in infection prevention and control (IPC) has often proven challenging. Innovative interventions such as 'serious games' have been proposed in other areas to educate and help clinicians adopt optimal behaviours. There is limited evidence about the application and evaluation of serious games in IPC. The purposes of the study were: a) to synthesise research evidence on the use of serious games in IPC to support healthcare workers' behaviour change and best practice learning; and b) to identify gaps across the formulation and evaluation of serious games in IPC.

methodsA scoping study was conducted using the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. We interrogated electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase Classic + Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar) in December 2015. Evidence from these studies was assessed against an analytic framework of intervention formulation and evaluation.

resultsNine hundred sixty five unique papers were initially identified, 23 included for full-text review, and four finally selected. Studies focused on intervention inception and development rather than implementation. Expert involvement in game design was reported in 2/4 studies. Potential game users were not included in needs assessment and game development. Outcome variables such as fidelity or sustainability were scarcely reported.

conclusionsThe growing interest in serious games for health has not been coupled with adequate evaluation of processes, outcomes and contexts involved. Explanations about the mechanisms by which game components may facilitate behaviour change are lacking, further hindering adoption.

Indexed as

AdoptionGamificationHealthcare-associated infectionImplementationScoping studySerious game

Identifiers

PMID27777755
PMCPMC5062920
OpenAlexW2530726026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.