Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38563873›Full record

SynthesisAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2024

Game design elements of serious games in the education of medical and healthcare professions: a mixed-methods systematic review of underlying theories and teaching effectiveness.

Alexandra Aster, Matthias Carl Laupichler, Saskia Zimmer, Tobias Raupach

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Alexandra AsterInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, D-53127, Bonn, Germany. alexandra.aster@ukbonn.de.ORCID 0000-0003-0407-3250
Matthias Carl LaupichlerInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, D-53127, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3104-1123
Saskia ZimmerInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, D-53127, Bonn, Germany.
Tobias RaupachInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, D-53127, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Serious games, as a learning resource, enhance their game character by embedding game design elements that are typically used in entertainment games. Serious games in its entirety have already proven their teaching effectiveness in different educational contexts including medical education. The embedded game design elements play an essential role for a game's effectiveness and thus they should be selected based on evidence-based theories. For game design elements embedded in serious games used for the education of medical and healthcare professions, an overview of theories for the selection lacks. Additionally, it is still unclear whether and how single game design elements affect the learning effectiveness. Therefore, the main aim of this systematic review is threefold. Firstly, light will be shed on the single game design elements used in serious games in this area. Second, the game design elements' underlying theories will be worked out, and third, the game design elements' effectiveness on student learning outcome will be assessed. Two literature searches were conducted in November 2021 and May 2022 in six literature databases with keywords covering the fields of educational game design, serious game, and medical education. Out of 1006 initial records, 91 were included after applying predefined exclusion criteria. Data analysis revealed that the three most common game design elements were points, storyline, and feedback. Only four underlying theories were mentioned, and no study evaluated specific game design elements. Since game design elements should be based on theories to ensure meaningful evaluations, the conceptual GATE framework is introduced, which facilitates the selection of evidence-based game design elements for serious games.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalHealth OccupationsHumansLearningTeachingEducational game designGame design elementsHealthcare educationMedical educationSerious gameSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38563873
PMCPMC11549195

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.