Trial reportLa Tunisie medicale
About the efficacy of a serious game in critical appraisal learning: a cluster randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in La Tunisie medicale. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Medical Education: The Role of Artificial Intelligence Tools in the Teaching-Learning Process.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSerious games have been reported to be a valuable method of learning for over a decade.
aimThe authors assessed the efficacy of using a serious games to teach critical appraisal practice to medical students in comparison to face-to-face learning methods.
methodsThis was a cluster randomised controlled trial including 3rd year medical students. The control group had to perform a critical appraisal of two articles guided by a checklist, while the intervention group performed a critical appraisal using a home-made serious game. Judgment criteria consisted of the students' scores attributed to their appraisal of a same article after the training period.
resultsTwenty-four students in the control and intervention group were enrolled in the study. There was no significant difference in scores between both groups. The satisfaction questionnaire highlighted more motivation and self-accomplishment feeling in the intervention group.
conclusionThis study didn't show a significant difference between the scores of both groups but the motivation of the students included in the intervention group was improved and encourages the use of both methods in critical appraisal teaching.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36571725PMC9976784W4313237062What 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.