Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28760730›Full record

ArticleJMIR serious games2017

Designing Serious Computer Games for People With Moderate and Advanced Dementia: Interdisciplinary Theory-Driven Pilot Study.

Chariklia Tziraki, Rakel Berenbaum, Daniel Gross, Judith Abikhzer, Boaz M Ben-David

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR serious games, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. A Review on Serious Games for Dementia Care in Ageing Societies.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2020
    Article
  15. Review
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 2 countries.

Chariklia Tziraki *Melabev - Community Clubs for Eldercare, Research and Development Department, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2662-6023
Rakel Berenbaum *Melabev - Community Clubs for Eldercare, Research and Development Department, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7946-1085
Daniel GrossMelabev - Community Clubs for Eldercare, Research and Development Department, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2381-8975
Judith AbikhzerMelabev - Community Clubs for Eldercare, Research and Development Department, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1450-8043
Boaz M Ben-David *Communication, Aging and Neuropsychology Lab (CANlab), Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzliya, Herzliya, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0392-962X
Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies · ILReichman University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe field of serious games for people with dementia (PwD) is mostly driven by game-design principals typically applied to games created by and for younger individuals. Little has been done developing serious games to help PwD maintain cognition and to support functionality.

objectivesWe aimed to create a theory-based serious game for PwD, with input from a multi-disciplinary team familiar with aging, dementia, and gaming theory, as well as direct input from end users (the iterative process). Targeting enhanced self-efficacy in daily activities, the goal was to generate a game that is acceptable, accessible and engaging for PwD.

methodsThe theory-driven game development was based on the following learning theories: learning in context, errorless learning, building on capacities, and acknowledging biological changes-all with the aim to boost self-efficacy. The iterative participatory process was used for game screen development with input of 34 PwD and 14 healthy community dwelling older adults, aged over 65 years. Development of game screens was informed by the bio-psychological aging related disabilities (ie, motor, visual, and perception) as well as remaining neuropsychological capacities (ie, implicit memory) of PwD. At the conclusion of the iterative development process, a prototype game with 39 screens was used for a pilot study with 24 PwD and 14 healthy community dwelling older adults. The game was played twice weekly for 10 weeks.

resultsQuantitative analysis showed that the average speed of successful screen completion was significantly longer for PwD compared with healthy older adults. Both PwD and controls showed an equivalent linear increase in the speed for task completion with practice by the third session (P<.02). Most important, the rate of improved processing speed with practice was not statistically different between PwD and controls. This may imply that some form of learning occurred for PwD at a nonsignificantly different rate than for controls. Qualitative results indicate that PwD found the game engaging and fun. Healthy older adults found the game too easy. Increase in self-reported self-efficacy was documented with PwD only.

conclusionsOur study demonstrated that PwD's speed improved with practice at the same rate as healthy older adults. This implies that when tasks are designed to match PwD's abilities, learning ensues. In addition, this pilot study of a serious game, designed for PwD, was accessible, acceptable, and enjoyable for end users. Games designed based on learning theories and input of end users and a multi-disciplinary team familiar with dementia and aging may have the potential of maintaining capacity and improving functionality of PwD. A larger longer study is needed to confirm our findings and evaluate the use of these games in assessing cognitive status and functionality.

Indexed as

dementiafunctionalitylearning in contextserious gamesspeed of processing

Identifiers

PMID28760730
PMCPMC5556257
OpenAlexW2742125881

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.