ArticleMedical education online2026
A quasi-experimental crossover study on student engagement and performance in a gamified team-based learning module in physiology.
Article in Medical education online, 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
purposeGamification is widely adopted in medical education, but recent systematic reviews reveal ambiguous effects on learning outcomes. It remains unclear whether engagement translates to learning or whether game mechanics impose extraneous cognitive load. This quasi-experimental crossover study investigated gamification's impact on student performance and engagement in Team-Based Learning.
method250 first-year MBBS students at a tertiary medical college (2024-2025) participated in two physiology modules (Central Nervous System, Endocrinology) using either traditional or gamified Group Readiness Assurance Tests (GRAT) in a crossover design. Primary outcomes were Individual Readiness (IRAT) and Application Exercise (AE) scores; secondary outcomes were engagement and satisfaction.
resultsPrimary outcomes (IRAT and AE scores) did not differ significantly between formats. However, learning trajectory analysis revealed a potential mitigating trend: in Endocrinology, traditional groups showed significant IRAT-to-AE decline (-3.3 percentage points,
conclusionsGamification may enhance engagement and may provide a motivational buffer against performance decline in challenging content. This suggest gamification is a context-sensitive design choice requiring careful calibration to balance motivational benefits against cognitive costs.
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.