ReviewJMIR serious games2021
The Making and Evaluation of Digital Games Used for the Assessment of Attention: Systematic Review.
Review 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 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the User Experience and Usability of Game-Based Cognitive Assessments for Older People: Systematic Review.JMIR aging · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the validity of game-based assessments measuring cognitive function among children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Progress in brain research · 2023Pooled it
- Automated Detection of Neurodevelopmental Disorders Using Face-to-Face Mobile Technology Among Typically Developing Greek Children: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2024Trial
- Real-time cognitive performance metrics derived from a digital therapeutic for inattention predict ADHD-related clinical outcomes: Replication across three independent trials of AKL-T01.Translational psychiatry · 2024Trial
- Gamified Assessment of Cognitive Impulsivity in Eating Disorders and Mental Ill-Health: Mixed Methods Study Incorporating Lived Experience Co-Design and Evaluation.JMIR serious games · 2026Article
- A Digital Tool for Assessing the Distinct Effects of Depression, Anxiety, and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) on Children's Emotional Cognitive Bias: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Leveraging Swipe Gesture Interactions From Mobile Games as Indicators of Anxiety and Depression: Exploratory Study.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- Digital assessment of cognitive-affective biases related to mental health.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Measuring the Reliability of a Gamified Stroop Task: Quantitative Experiment.JMIR serious games · 2024Article
- A touching advantage: cross-modal stop-signals improve reactive response inhibition.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Integrating music therapy and video games in cognitive interventions: innovative applications of closed-loop EEG.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2024Article
- Experience of Youths and Older People With Virtual Reality Games for Cognitive Assessment: Inductive Thematic Analysis and Insights for Key Stakeholders.JMIR XR and spatial computing · 2024Article
- Identifying Game-Based Digital Biomarkers of Cognitive Risk for Adolescent Substance Misuse: Protocol for a Proof-of-Concept Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- No effects of 1 Hz offline TMS on performance in the stop-signal game.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Design Preferences for a Serious Game-Based Cognitive Assessment of Older Adults in Prison: Thematic Analysis.JMIR serious games · 2023Article
- Digital Biomarkers for Well-being Through Exergame Interactions: Exploratory Study.JMIR serious games · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSerious games are now widely used in many contexts, including psychological research and clinical use. One area of growing interest is that of cognitive assessment, which seeks to measure different cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and perception. Measuring these functions at both the population and individual levels can inform research and indicate health issues. Attention is an important function to assess, as an accurate measure of attention can help diagnose many common disorders, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and dementia. However, using games to assess attention poses unique problems, as games inherently manipulate attention through elements such as sound effects, graphics, and rewards, and research on adding game elements to assessments (ie, gamification) has shown mixed results. The process for developing cognitive tasks is robust, with high psychometric standards that must be met before these tasks are used for assessment. Although games offer more diverse approaches for assessment, there is no standard for how they should be developed or evaluated.
objectiveTo better understand the field and provide guidance to interdisciplinary researchers, we aim to answer the question: How are digital games used for the cognitive assessment of attention made and measured?
methodsWe searched several databases for papers that described a digital game used to assess attention that could be deployed remotely without specialized hardware. We used Rayyan, a systematic review software, to screen the records before conducting a systematic review.
resultsThe initial database search returned 49,365 papers. Our screening process resulted in a total of 74 papers that used a digital game to measure cognitive functions related to attention. Across the studies in our review, we found three approaches to making assessment games: gamifying cognitive tasks, creating custom games based on theories of cognition, and exploring potential assessment properties of commercial games. With regard to measuring the assessment properties of these games (eg, how accurately they assess attention), we found three approaches: comparison to a traditional cognitive task, comparison to a clinical diagnosis, and comparison to knowledge of cognition; however, most studies in our review did not evaluate the game's properties (eg, if participants enjoyed the game).
conclusionsOur review provides an overview of how games used for the assessment of attention are developed and evaluated. We further identified three barriers to advancing the field: reliance on assumptions, lack of evaluation, and lack of integration and standardization. We then recommend the best practices to address these barriers. Our review can act as a resource to help guide the field toward more standardized approaches and rigorous evaluation required for the widespread adoption of assessment games.
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.