ArticleProceedings of the ... European conference on games based learning. European Conference on Games Based Learning, author2024
What Matters to Patients: Community-Engaged Design for Healthcare-Related Serious Games.
Article in Proceedings of the ... European conference on games based learning. European Conference on Games Based Learning, author, 2024. 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
Abstract
Narrative-based serious games are accessible, engaging technologies that connect users' lived experiences to pedagogy. Despite having patient-centered goals, most narrative-based serious games are not designed alongside patients and communities, limiting their likelihood of acceptance, uptake, and impact. Literature reveals that many serious games intended for patients merely evaluate efficacy with end-users after game deployment and with a lack of consistent participatory design. This work aims to describe a patient-centered participatory approach to game development to teach self-advocacy skills to patients newly diagnosed with cancer. First, characters were developed based on panels that included patient advocates, cancer survivors, clinicians, and researchers. Second, storyline development created realistic story arcs, decision-points, and consequences based on qualitative interviews with patients, patient advocates, and cancer survivors. Third, game evaluation metrics (e.g., 1st vs. 3rd person perspective, game fail states that incentivize replaying the game, and provision of implicit or explicit feedback) were developed based on accessibility, usability, and patient preferences. Based on patients' insights, we implemented changes accordingly to maximize the game's efficacy and collected qualitative data on patients' assessment of the game's accessibility, relevance, and impact. During initial game development, patient and advocate feedback built relatable characters with a particular focus on providing sensitive information (e.g., palliative care) and inclusive storylines (e.g., diverse family situations). Following a prototype, patients and advocates suggested refinements to characters and additional storylines, including common and/or distressing experiences related to pain management, family dynamics, financial struggles, and disrespect from healthcare providers. Participants in a randomized trial of the game (N=34) found the scenarios relevant and realistic. Patients reported increased comfort speaking up, seeking support, and interacting with their families and healthcare team after playing the game. Our process demonstrates the essential role patients can inhabit in the development of narrative serious games, particularly in how patient input permeated every aspect of Strong Together's development, from initial design to evaluation. Such integration allows for adjustments to address patient concerns and refine patient-relevant metrics.
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.