Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32257409›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2020

Creating and testing a GCP game in an asynchronous course environment: The game and future plans.

Carolynn T Jones, Penelope Jester, Jennifer A Croker, Jessica Fritter, Cathy Roche, Brian Wallace, Andrew O Westfall, David T Redden, James Willig

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Carolynn T JonesMasters of Applied Clinical and Preclinical Research, College of Nursing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Penelope JesterMasters of Applied Clinical and Preclinical Research, College of Nursing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Jennifer A CrokerCenter for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Jessica FritterMasters of Applied Clinical and Preclinical Research, College of Nursing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Cathy RocheSchool of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Brian WallaceCenter for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Andrew O WestfallCenter for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
David T ReddenCenter for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
James WilligCenter for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.

Funding

National Dissemination of I-Corps@NCATS: Accelerating Translation through CommercializationUL1TR003096 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI GUTIERREZ, ORLANDO M, KIMBERLY, ROBERT P. · 2019 to 2023
$43.6M
UAB Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS)UL1TR001417 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI KIMBERLY, ROBERT P. · 2015 to 2018
$31.4M
The OSU Center for Clinical and Translational Science: Advancing Today's Discoveries to Improve HealthUL1TR002733 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI RINGEL, MATTHEW D · 2018 to 2022
$28.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001417NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002733NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR003096
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe National Institute of Health has mandated good clinical practice (GCP) training for all clinical research investigators and professionals. We developed a GCP game using the Kaizen-Education platform. The GCP Kaizen game was designed to help clinical research professionals immerse themselves into applying International Conference on Harmonization GCP (R2) guidelines in the clinical research setting through case-based questions.

methodsStudents were invited to participate in the GCP Kaizen game as part of their 100% online academic Masters during the Spring 2019 semester. The structure of the game consisted of 75 original multiple choice and 25 repeated questions stemming from fictitious vignettes that were distributed across 10 weeks. Each question presented a teachable rationale after the answers were submitted. At the end of the game, a satisfaction survey was issued to collect player satisfaction data on the game platform, content, experience as well as perceptions of GCP learning and future GCP concept application.

resultsThere were 71 total players who participated and answered at least one question. Of those, 53 (75%) answered all 100 questions. The game had a high Cronbach's alpha, and item analyses provided information on question quality, thus assisting us in future quality edits before re-testing and wider dissemination.

conclusionsThe GCP Kaizen game provides an alternative method for mandated GCP training using principles of gamification. It proved to be a reliable and an effective educational method with high player satisfaction.

Indexed as

clinical researchclinical research professionalsGamificationGCP traininggood clinical practices

Identifiers

PMID32257409
PMCPMC7103470

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.