Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41118641›Full record

ReviewJMIR serious games2025

Serious Games for Preventing Musculoskeletal Disorders in Occupational Settings: Scoping Review.

Thomas Rivière, Thibaud Hulin, Farzan Sasangohar, Mohsen Zare

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR serious games, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Thomas RivièreELLIADD (UR 4661), UTBM, Université Marie et Louis Pasteur, Belfort, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4835-5447
Thibaud HulinELLIADD (UR 4661), Université Marie et Louis Pasteur, Montbéliard, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1607-9994
Farzan SasangoharDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9962-5470
Mohsen ZareELLIADD (UR 4661), UTBM, Université Marie et Louis Pasteur, Belfort, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5245-124X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMusculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a significant health concern in the workplace, and while ergonomic interventions are commonly used, their long-term effectiveness is often questioned. Serious games (SGs), designed to go beyond entertainment, have emerged as a promising tool that may address some of the limitations of traditional interventions, such as the need for sustained impact and greater worker engagement.

objectiveThis review aims to identify and analyze the key characteristics of SGs-including design, gameplay, and expected outcomes-that have been developed for the prevention or mitigation of work-related MSDs. Additionally, it explores the documented effects of SG implementation, assessing their potential contribution to MSD prevention and intervention strategies.

methodsA scoping review was conducted across 6 scientific databases (APA PsycInfo, Web of Science, Science Direct, MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar) to identify relevant studies published up to 2025. The selection process involved a multistep screening, including title and abstract review, followed by full-text assessment by 2 independent reviewers. Studies included were original research articles in English addressing MSD prevention and mitigation. Exclusions applied to studies on nonwork-related MSDs, limited content, duplicates, or repurposed entertainment games or gamification solutions. Data extraction was performed using a standardized form to capture key study characteristics. A 2-level analysis was applied: descriptive analysis, categorizing studies based on study characteristics and primary focus (design, evaluation, or both), and content-based analysis, examining game design, gameplay, expected outcomes, and evaluation methods to provide a structured synthesis of findings.

resultsThe initial search identified 2700 records, with 15 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. These studies explored diverse applications of SGs for MSD prevention, focusing either on game design and development or on educational impact assessment. Notably, only 2 studies comprehensively addressed both design methodology and educational evaluation. Findings revealed considerable variability in design approaches, technological platforms, gameplay mechanics, and expected outcomes. Additionally, the literature exhibited significant inconsistencies in evaluating SG effectiveness, with methodological limitations affecting comparability. While some studies targeted rehabilitation or occupational health and safety, only a few explicitly focused on MSD prevention, with a predominant emphasis on physical risk factors, whereas psychosocial and organizational aspects remained largely underexplored.

conclusionsThis review highlights the need for standardized protocols and criteria for the design and evaluation of SGs to enable further synthesis and impact measurement. The integration of MSD prevention into SGs remains limited and is often approached indirectly through related themes such as workplace safety or rehabilitation. Future research should focus on developing and validating more comprehensive SG-based interventions and exploring their potential as effective tools in occupational health. The findings indicate a substantial gap in empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of SGs for MSD prevention, largely due to the disparity in experimental approaches.

Indexed as

exergamingmusculoskeletal disordersoccupational healthpreventionserious gamesvideo games

Identifiers

PMID41118641
PMCPMC12587018

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.