Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42294046›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026

Practical applications of gamification in patient-centered outcomes research and digital health, and its acceptance in clinical trials.

Christopher Hartford, Roland Barge, Tenage McDowell, Beth Gentsch, Tara Symonds, Diana Rofail

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. 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

6 authors.

Christopher HartfordRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sleepy Hollow, NY, United States.
Roland BargeRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sleepy Hollow, NY, United States.
Tenage McDowellClinical Outcomes Solutions, Folkestone, Kent, United Kingdom.
Beth GentschWashington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States.
Tara SymondsClinical Outcomes Solutions, Folkestone, Kent, United Kingdom.
Diana RofailRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sleepy Hollow, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The application of game elements to engage participants and improve data collection for clinical trials is relatively novel, with limited research around the impact of gamification in clinical research. This article explores published literature and surveys from patients and clinical sites. Methods: A targeted literature review was completed in November 2025 to identify published articles (≤10 years) on the application of gamification in clinical trials. Synthesized findings informed the design of two surveys of US adults ( Results: Twenty-four articles were focused on the application of gaming design and mechanics to non-gaming activities. Three primary areas identified were education ( Conclusions: Potential advantages of gamification include increased engagement, trial education, adherence to protocols, and enjoyment of the clinical trial experience, which may increase retention and data completeness. Further research is required to better understand the potential impact of gamification on scores of how patients feel or function.

Indexed as

clinical trialseducatione-learninggame-based learninggamificationpatient experiencesite experience

Identifiers

PMID42294046
PMCPMC13260181

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.