ArticleJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2022
Enhancing our ability to diagnose cardiac valve disease by applying a graphical educational game.
Article in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to compare a newly designed graphical educational game (GEG) with a case-based learning (CBL) exercise and to enhance our ability to apply physiological knowledge of the cardiac cycle to diagnose cardiac valvular diseases among preclinical medical students. Methods: In this interventional study, first-year undergraduate medical students were randomly assigned to a GEG group (n = 42) and a CBL group (n = 37). The GEG group involved shading cardiac cycle graphs and pressure-volume loops while the CBL group worked on two cases of cardiac valve diseases. A multiple-choice question (MCQ) test was then used to assess conceptual understanding of the cardiac cycle. After brief exposure to murmur auscultation on a simulator manikin, the groups were assessed in a simulator manikin test for their ability to diagnose cardiac valve disease. Median MCQ scores and mean scores in the simulator test were then compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. The student's perspectives of the GEG and simulation session were acquired on a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire. Results: The GEG group had significantly higher median MCQ scores (p < 0.001) and mean simulator test scores (p < 0.001) when compared to the CBL group. Moreover, 91% of students agreed that the GEG helped them to clarify concepts, and 88% agreed that the concepts and knowledge gained through the GEG helped them to diagnose valve disease in the manikins. Conclusion: The GEG was positively received by students and was more useful than the CBL in enhancing the application of cardiac physiology concepts and improving diagnostic ability in a simulated clinical setting.
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.