ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Effectiveness of AI-Supported Game-Based Learning: A Systematic Review of Outcomes, Challenges, and Future Directions.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAI-supported game-based learning (AI-GBL) integrates artificial intelligence mechanisms, including adaptive difficulty adjustment, large language model (LLM) scaffolding, intelligent non-player characters (NPCs), and stealth assessment, into game-based educational environments.
objectiveThis systematic review synthesizes the empirical evidence on AI-GBL effectiveness, adaptive mechanisms, and intelligent assessment approaches across diverse educational contexts.
methodFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, 55 peer-reviewed empirical studies (2021-2026) were identified from Web of Science and Scopus databases. Two independent reviewers screened records (κ = 0.89; 100% consensus on disagreements), extracted data using a standardized coding scheme, and assessed methodological quality using a five-criterion rubric. A thematic synthesis approach was adopted due to the heterogeneity of the evidence base.
resultsThe reviewed studies generally suggest promising positive effects of AI-GBL on knowledge acquisition, intrinsic motivation, and affective engagement under a range of educational conditions. LLM-based scaffolding reduces cognitive load but risks fostering passive dependency; adaptive difficulty adjustment benefits depend critically on the direction and magnitude of adaptation; AI NPCs function as credible instructional partners in both EFL and STEM contexts; stealth assessment achieves AUCs of 0.848-0.913. Challenges include algorithmic bias in assessment models, LLM latency, over-reliance risks, and a near absence of longitudinal evidence.
conclusionsAI-GBL's effectiveness rests on principled alignment between AI mechanisms and learning theory rather than algorithmic sophistication per se. Equity-by-design approaches and longitudinal evidence constitute the field's priority research needs.
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.