Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38025174›Full record

ArticleInnovations in pharmacy2023

Evaluation of a Patient Education Game Design Activity.

Andrea L Porter, Olivia Kim, Olufunmilola Abraham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innovations in pharmacy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Andrea L PorterUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison School of Pharmacy, Madison, WI.
Olivia KimUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison School of Pharmacy, Madison, WI.
Olufunmilola AbrahamUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison School of Pharmacy, Madison, WI.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGame-based learning has been used in pharmacy education settings with the instructor developing a game for students to play to enhance learning. However, there is a paucity of data about health sciences students designing a game themselves to further their understanding of a complex topic. The purpose of this study was to describe and assess a game design activity focused on patient education of anticoagulants in a pharmacotherapy skills laboratory setting. INNOVATION: Second-year pharmacy students enrolled in a pharmacotherapy skills laboratory course worked in teams in a one-hour active learning activity to design a game intended to educate patients about their medication. A pre/post analysis of student attitudes about game-based learning and the activity, as well as knowledge, was conducted.

findingsThe large majority of students (80.5%) agreed that the activity was an effective way to develop patient education strategies. Through the survey and free-response questions, students reported that the game design activity facilitated positive group collaboration and allowed students to take the perspective of their patients. Students also requested additional time to complete the activity. Knowledge assessment scores of key patient education points increased from 66.5% prior to the activity to 71.5% one week following the activity (p<0.05).

conclusionThe game design activity served as a novel teaching method for pharmacy students to actively learn about anticoagulant medications while developing an innovative patient education strategy. Although there was an increase in knowledge scores, students highlighted the impact on group collaboration and taking the perspective of their patients.

Indexed as

active learninggame designinnovative learningpatient educationperspective taking

Identifiers

PMID38025174
PMCPMC10653723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.