Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37898743›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

The influence of Gamification on medical students' diagnostic decision making and awareness of medical cost: a mixed-method study.

Kosuke Ishizuka, Kiyoshi Shikino, Hajme Kasai, Yoji Hoshina, Saito Miura, Tomoko Tsukamoto, Kazuyo Yamauchi, Shoichi Ito, Masatomi Ikusaka

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kosuke IshizukaDepartment of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, 1-8-1, Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba-city, Chiba pref, Japan. e103007c@yokohama-cu.ac.jp.
Kiyoshi ShikinoDepartment of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, 1-8-1, Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba-city, Chiba pref, Japan.
Hajme KasaiHealth Professional Development Center, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Yoji HoshinaDepartment of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, 1-8-1, Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba-city, Chiba pref, Japan.
Saito MiuraDepartment of Psychiatry, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Tomoko TsukamotoDepartment of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, 1-8-1, Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba-city, Chiba pref, Japan.
Kazuyo YamauchiDepartment of Community-oriented Medical Education, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Shoichi ItoHealth Professional Development Center, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Masatomi IkusakaDepartment of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, 1-8-1, Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba-city, Chiba pref, Japan.
Chiba University Hospital · JPChiba University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe gamification of learning increases student enjoyment, and motivation and engagement in learning tasks. This study investigated the effects of gamification using decision-making cards (DMCs) on diagnostic decision-making and cost using case scenarios.

methodThirty medical students in clinical clerkship participated and were randomly assigned to 14 small groups of 2-3 medical students each. Decision-making was gamified using DMCs with a clinical information heading and medical cost on the front, and clinical information details on the back. First, each team was provided with brief clinical information on case scenarios. Subsequently, DMCs depending on the case were distributed to each team, and team members chose cards one at a time until they reached a diagnosis of the case. The total medical cost was then scored based on the number and contents of cards drawn. Four case scenarios were conducted. The quantitative outcomes including confidence in effective clinical decision-making, motivation to learn diagnostic decision-making, and awareness of medical costs were measured before and after our gamification by self-evaluation using a 7-point Likert scale. The qualitative component consisted of a content analysis on the benefits of learning clinical reasoning using DMCs.

resultConfidence in effective clinical decision-making, motivation to learn diagnostic decision-making, and awareness of medical cost were significantly higher after the gamification. Furthermore, comparing the clinical case scenario tackled last with the one tackled first, the average medical cost of all cards drawn by students decreased significantly from 11,921 to 8,895 Japanese yen. In the content analysis, seven advantage categories of DMCs corresponding to clinical reasoning components were extracted (information gathering, hypothesis generation, problem representation, differential diagnosis, leading or working diagnosis, diagnostic justification, and management and treatment).

conclusionTeaching medical students clinical reasoning using DMCs can improve clinical decision-making confidence and learning motivation, and reduces medical cost in clinical case scenarios. In addition, it can help students to acquire practical knowledge, deepens their understanding of clinical reasoning, and identifies several important clinical reasoning skills including diagnostic decision-making and awareness of medical costs. Gamification using DMCs can be an effective teaching method for improving medical students' diagnostic decision-making and reducing costs.

Indexed as

Students, MedicalClinical Decision-MakingDecision MakingGamificationHumansProblem SolvingClinical reasoningDecision makingDiagnostic errorGamificationMedical cost

Identifiers

PMID37898743
PMCPMC10613361
OpenAlexW4388013038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.