ArticleBrazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica2024
Assessing the reaction to and efficacy of the Screener drug discovery and development board game as a pedagogical tool in postgraduate courses.
Article in Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica, 2024. 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.
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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Screener, a board game supplemented with online resources, was introduced and distributed by the Brazilian Society of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics to postgraduate programs as an instructional tool for the process of drug discovery and development (DDD). In this study, we provided a comprehensive analysis of five critical aspects for evaluating the quality of educational games, namely: 1) description of the intervention; 2) underlying pedagogical theory; 3) identification of local educational gaps; 4) impact on diverse stakeholders; and 5) elucidation of iterative quality enhancement processes. We also present qualitative and quantitative assessments of the effectiveness of this game in 11 postgraduate courses. We employed the MEEGA+ online survey, comprising thirty-three close-ended unipolar items with 5-point Likert-type response scales, to assess student perceptions of the quality and utility of Screener. Based on 115 responses, the results indicated a highly positive outlook among students. In addition, we performed a preliminary evaluation of learning outcomes in two courses involving 28 students. Pre- and post-quizzes were applied, each consisting of 20 True/False questions directly aligned with the game's content. The analysis revealed significant improvement in students' performance following engagement with the game, with scores rising from 8.4 to 13.3 (P<0.0001, paired t-test) and 9.7 to 12.7 (P<0.0001, paired t-test). These findings underscore the utility of Screener as an enjoyable and effective tool for facilitating a positive learning experience in the DDD process. Notably, the game can also reduce the educational disparities across different regions of our continental country.
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.