ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Gamification in the classroom: Kahoot! As a tool for university teaching innovation.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Analysis of research on gamification, critical thinking and academic performance: A systematic review in the context of higher education.F1000Research · 2025Pooled it
- Gamified Physical Education and Cognitive Performance Among Chinese Secondary School Students: Cross-Sectional Moderation Mediation Study.JMIR serious games · 2026Article
- The Impact and Acceptance of Gamification by Learners in a Digital Literacy Course at the Undergraduate Level: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR serious games · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study has been to evaluate the use of gamification in the classroom, in terms of its effects on attention, concentration, creativity, and generic capabilities, for university students enrolled in a Bachelor's degree program in Physiotherapy. Methods: An experimental design was implemented, using three groups differentiated by their time of exposure to the game (0 min, 30 min, or 60 min per week). The sample consisted of 73 s-year students from a Bachelor's degree program in Physiotherapy. The theoretical content for each class was taught during a period of 4 months, reinforced by use of the Kahoot! Online platform. Selective attention and concentration were evaluated using the d2 Test of Attention; creative intelligence using the Creative Intelligence Test (CREA); and generic capabilities using the capabilities subscale of the Student Engagement Questionnaire (SEQ). Results: The study's participants had a mean age of 19.51 ± 0.9 years, and it has demonstrated that use of Kahoot! For longer periods of time, i.e., more than 60 min per day, can improve essential skills in university students, such as attention, creativity, critical thinking, self-managed learning, adaptability, problem solving, and computer literacy. This study's results show that integrating Kahoot! Into the educational environment, especially with longer sessions that allow for deeper immersion in the game, produces benefits by stimulating various cognitive aspects and enhancing complex skills. Conclusion: This study has demonstrated that use of Kahoot! Improves key skills such as attention, creativity, and critical thinking, especially when longer sessions are used. It is also suggested that its use should be balanced with other educational activities, in order to achieve comprehensive development for the students.
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.