ArticleJMIR serious games2021
Involvement of End Users in the Development of Serious Games for Health Care Professions Education: Systematic Descriptive Review.
Article in JMIR serious games, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Formative Evaluation of a Narrative-Based Serious Game for Pregnancy Education: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Process Evaluation of Interdisciplinary Experiences During the Development of a Serious Game About Radiotherapy for Children: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Gamifying anatomy outreach: An underexplored opportunity.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Review
- Development and evaluation of an emergency department serious game for undergraduate medical students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Children and Young People's Involvement in Designing Applied Games: Scoping Review.JMIR serious games · 2023Article
- The untapped potential of Games for Health in times of crises. A critical reflection.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Co-creation of a Serious Game About Radiotherapy: Participatory Action Research Study With Children Treated for Cancer.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Serious Games Without Screens. Comment on "Involvement of End Users in the Development of Serious Games for Health Care Professions Education: Systematic Descriptive Review".JMIR serious games · 2022Article
- Developing a Health Game to Prepare Preschool Children for Anesthesia: Formative Study Using a Child-Centered Approach.JMIR serious games · 2022Article
- Peer Facilitators as Core Co-developers of an Online Peer Encouragement Network (OPEN2chat) for Austrian Adolescents.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOn the basis of ethical and methodological arguments, numerous calls have been made to increase the involvement of end users in the development of serious games (SGs). Involving end users in the development process is considered a way to give them power and control over educational software that is designed for them. It can also help identify areas for improvement in the design of SGs and improve their efficacy in targeted learning outcomes. However, no recognized guidelines or frameworks exist to guide end users' involvement in SG development.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to describe how end users are involved in the development of SGs for health care professions education.
methodsWe examined the literature presenting the development of 45 SGs that had reached the stage of efficacy evaluation in randomized trials. One author performed data extraction using an ad hoc form based on a design and development framework for SGs. Data were then coded and synthesized on the basis of similarities. The coding scheme was refined iteratively with the involvement of a second author. Results are presented using frequencies and percentages.
resultsEnd users' involvement was mentioned in the development of 21 of 45 SGs. The number of end users involved ranged from 12 to 36. End users were often involved in answering specific concerns that arose during the SG design (n=6) or in testing a prototype (n=12). In many cases, researchers solicited input from end users regarding the goals to reach (n=10) or the functional esthetics of the SGs (n=7). Most researchers used self-reported questionnaires (n=7).
conclusionsResearchers mentioned end users' involvement in the development of less than half of the identified SGs, and this involvement was also poorly described. These findings represent significant limitations to evaluating the impact of the involvement of end users on the efficacy of SGs and in making recommendations regarding their involvement.
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.