SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
The effects of educational drama on students' key competencies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study systematically evaluated the effects of educational drama interventions on students' key competencies. A meta-analysis was conducted of randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials published through December 2025 and identified through searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, and ProQuest Central. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model, and exploratory subgroup analyses were performed to examine whether participant characteristics, intervention duration, and study design might contribute to between-study heterogeneity. A total of 27 studies involving 2,239 participants were included. The findings suggest that educational drama may contribute to improvements in creativity (SMD = 1.12, 95% CI [0.68, 1.57]) and critical thinking (SMD = 0.91, 95% CI [0.16, 1.67]), with positive pooled effects also observed for communication (SMD = 2.90, 95% CI [1.59, 4.20]) and collaboration (SMD = 2.00, 95% CI [0.60, 3.39]). However, substantial heterogeneity was observed across all outcomes. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the pooled effects for communication and critical thinking remained statistically significant after the exclusion of studies reporting unusually large effect sizes, whereas the pooled effect for collaboration became non-significant after the exclusion of the study reporting the largest effect size. Overall, the available evidence suggests that educational drama may contribute to improvements in students' creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration. Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted with caution because of the substantial heterogeneity, the influence of several studies reporting unusually large effect sizes, and the absence of formal, design-specific risk-of-bias assessments, such as RoB 2 and ROBINS-I. Future research employing more rigorous study designs and standardized risk-of-bias assessment procedures is needed to strengthen the evidence base. Systematic Review Registration: Identifier INPLASY (INPLASY202640038).
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.