ReviewResuscitation plus2024
Gamified learning for resuscitation education: A systematic review.
Review in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 2025 Korean Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Part 10. Education and system implementation for enhanced chain of survival.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2026Guideline
- Gamified Adult Basic Life Support Training for Schoolchildren Using Minecraft Education Edition: Cross-Sectional Program Evaluation.JMIR serious games · 2026Article
- From street to lifesaving: a pre-post study of a blended serious game-based CPR training program for food delivery riders.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Acceptability and effectiveness of training elementary and secondary students in gamified CPR and AED use in three Canadian provinces.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Feasibility of public CPR training kiosks to increase bystander resuscitation: a Monte Carlo simulation study.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Virtual reality, real-world rhythm: evaluating gamified training for medical students.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Enhancing Equity in Schoolchildren's Basic Life Support Education in Brazil Through Serious Games: Cohort Study.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
- Deconstructing resuscitation training for healthcare providers: a protocol for a component network meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Association between the use of daily injury risk estimation feedback (I-REF) based on machine learning techniques and injuries in athletics (track and field): results of a prospective cohort study over an athletics season.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2025Article
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
Aim: To systematically review published literature to evaluate the impact of gamified learning on educational and clinical outcomes during life support education. Methods: This systematic review was conducted as part of the continuous evidence evaluation process of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). A search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane was conducted from inception until February 12, 2024. Studies examining incorporation of gamified learning were eligible for inclusion. Reviewers independently extracted data on study design and outcomes; appropriate risk of bias assessment tools were used across all outcomes. Results: 2261 articles were identified and screened, yielding sixteen articles (seven randomized trials, nine observational studies) which comprised the final review. No meta-analyses were conducted due to significant heterogeneity of intervention, population, and outcome. Only one study was found to have a low risk of bias; the remaining studies were found to have moderate to high risk. Fourteen studies were in healthcare providers and two were in laypersons. Most studies (11 of 16) examined the impact of a digital platform (computer or smartphone). Most (15 of 16) studies found a positive effect on at least one educational domain; one study found no effect. No included study found a negative effect on any educational domain. Conclusion: This systematic review found a very heterogeneous group of studies with low certainty evidence, all but one of which demonstrated a positive effect on one or more educational domains. Future studies should examine the underlying causes of improved learning with gamification and assess the resource requirements with implementation and dissemination of gamified learning.
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.