Trial reportNursing open2021
Nursing students' evaluation of a gamified public health educational webinar: A comparative pilot study.
Trial report in Nursing open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Game-thinking; utilizing serious games and gamification in nursing education - a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Nursing students' evaluation of a gamified public health educational webinar: A comparative pilot study.Nursing open · 2021Trial
- One Size Does not Fit All: Gamified Escape Room Learning for Students With ADHD and Language Difficulties in a Quasi-Experimental Cohort Study.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Gamification in Stomatherapy: Virtual Game for Pressure Injury Care.International journal of telemedicine and applications · 2026Article
- Exploring nursing students' need for social presence and its relevance to their learning preferences.Nursing open · 2022Article
- Technological mediation and humanization of nursing care: a systematic literature review.Revista CuidarteArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare undergraduate nursing students' evaluations of a gamified educational webinar to a non-gamified version. Both webinars covered the topic "Determinants of health," part of public health education.
designA post-test evaluation design with a comparison group, and an additional qualitative component.
methodsFirst-year students reading for a Bachelor of Science in Nursing at the Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology were randomly allocated into two classes of 26 students each, and to the gamified and non-gamified webinars. The revised "Students Evaluations of Educational Quality" questionnaire was sent to all participants. Participants were also asked to provide comments on their learning experience.
resultsA total of 40 participants who attended the gamified and non-gamified webinars completed the questionnaire. Educational quality was perceived as "good" to "very good," in both groups. Most participants in the gamified webinar group remarked that gamification helped to increase their engagement and interaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.