ArticleBMC medical education2026
Paper-based gamification to enhance competency-based education in an obstetrics clerkship.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical clerkships are essential for competency-based medical education (CBME). However, students' learning opportunities often vary by case availability, rotation timing, and supervisory practices. Gamification may support learner engagement, but many interventions rely on digital platforms that can be difficult to implement in busy clinical environments. This study evaluated whether a low-resource, paper-based gamification tool could support structured learning in an undergraduate obstetrics and gynecology clerkship.
methodsThis quasi-experimental study included 102 fifth-year medical students who completed a required obstetrics and gynecology clerkship at Saga University between October 2023 and September 2024. Students were assigned by the institutional rotation schedule to either a conventional clerkship group (n = 50) or an intervention group using a paper-based "stamp rally" (n = 52). The intervention consisted of 20 observable clinical tasks mapped to clerkship competencies and requiring instructor verification. Outcomes included self-reported satisfaction, sense of achievement, self-efficacy, self-directed learning, task completion rate, written examination score, and free-text comments.
resultsCompared with the conventional group, the intervention group reported higher satisfaction (4.3 ± 0.6 vs. 3.6 ± 0.7, p < 0.01), sense of achievement (4.4 ± 0.5 vs. 3.5 ± 0.6, p < 0.01), self-efficacy (4.2 ± 0.6 vs. 3.7 ± 0.7, p < 0.05), and self-directed learning (4.3 ± 0.5 vs. 3.6 ± 0.7, p < 0.01). The intervention group also had a higher documented task completion rate (92.3% ± 7.3% vs. 75.9% ± 10.5%, p < 0.01) and higher short-term written examination scores (85.0 ± 5.9 vs. 78.2 ± 6.8, p < 0.05). Free-text comments suggested that the intervention clarified expectations, promoted proactive engagement, and provided visible progress feedback.
conclusionsA paper-based gamification tool was associated with higher motivation-related outcomes, greater documented completion of listed clinical tasks, and higher short-term written examination scores in an undergraduate obstetrics and gynecology clerkship. By translating clerkship objectives into visible and verifiable activities, this low-resource approach may help operationalize CBME-oriented clinical learning. Further multicenter and longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate whether improvements in engagement and task completion translate into durable competency development and workplace-based performance.
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.