Trial reportBMJ open2021
Game jams for cultural safety training in Colombian medical education: a pilot randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Four analysis moments for fuzzy cognitive mapping in participatory research.Global health action · 2024Article
- Fuzzy cognitive mapping in participatory research and decision making: a practice review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
- Educational games created by medical students in a cultural safety training game jam: a qualitative descriptive study.BMC medical education · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesExplore the acceptability and feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess game jams-participatory events to cocreate digital or board games in a time-constrained environment-in cultural safety training of medical students. The pilot tests methods and procedures and explores the validity and reliability of our research instrument.
designTwo-arm parallel-group pilot RCT with a 1:1 allocation ratio.
settingFaculty of Medicine in Chia, Colombia.
participants79 final-year medical students completed the baseline questionnaire. 64 completed the assessment immediately after the intervention: 31 in the intervention group (20 female) and 33 in the control group (18 female). 35 completed the final assessment (18 control and 17 intervention) 4 months after the intervention.
interventionsThe intervention group joined a 5-hour game jam composed of a 1-hour lecture and a 4-hour session to create and to play educational games about cultural safety. The control group had a 1-hour conventional lesson, followed by a 4-hour study session of selected readings on cultural safety. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The instrument, an online self-administered Likert-type questionnaire, assessed a self-reported cultural safety results chain based on a planned behaviour theory. Student recruitment, retention and perception of the activity determined acceptability. The methodological and logistical factors for a full-scale study determined feasibility.
resultsAfter the intervention, students randomised to that arm reported a slightly higher cultural safety score (26.9) than those in the control group (25.9) (difference -1, 95% CI -3.0 to 1.0). Students described game jam learning in favourable terms and considered cultural safety training relevant. The university authorised the conduct of the full-scale trial.
conclusionGame jam learning is feasible and acceptable for cultural safety training of Colombian medical students. Researchers and educators may find our results informative in the design of RCTs assessing educational interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14261595 (stage: pilot study results).
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.