Analog Serious Games for Medical Education: A Scoping Review.

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Academic Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000005911
Sarah L Edwards, Aryana Zarandi, Michael Cosimini, Teresa M Chan, Monica Abudukebier, Mikaela L Stiver
{"title":"Analog Serious Games for Medical Education: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Sarah L Edwards, Aryana Zarandi, Michael Cosimini, Teresa M Chan, Monica Abudukebier, Mikaela L Stiver","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Serious games are increasingly used in medical education to actively engage learners. Analog serious games are a nondigital subset of serious games with specific purposes that go beyond entertainment. This scoping review describes the literature pertaining to analog serious games and provides recommendations regarding gaps and emerging directions for future research.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The authors conducted a scoping review following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, searching 3 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL) for studies of analog serious games designed for physician-track learners published from January 2013 through December 2023. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts, whereas 1 of 5 authors screened each full text and extracted data from eligible records. The authors iteratively analyzed the data within numerous categories and coded the findings to examine how the field has evolved during the past decade.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The searches retrieved 3,955 records with 865 duplicates. The authors reviewed 3,090 title and abstract records and 202 full-text records. Eighty-eight records met the inclusion criteria, including research reports, conference abstracts, descriptive reports, and short innovation reports. The peak years for publications were 2019 and 2023 (15 publications each). Fewer abstracts and articles were published during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., 2020-2022). The most common scholarship type was description studies (63 [72%]), whereas the dominant game formats were board games (51 [58%]) and card games (33 [38%]). Most studies tested analog serious games with medical students (60 [68%]) and/or residents and fellows (39 [44%]), with numerous studies including mixed study populations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This scoping review demonstrates moderate growth within the field of analog serious games, along with numerous opportunities for future research. Although analog game-based learning cannot entirely replace traditional pedagogical approaches, analog serious games have potential to meaningfully complement education for physician-track learners in all medical training stages.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005911","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Serious games are increasingly used in medical education to actively engage learners. Analog serious games are a nondigital subset of serious games with specific purposes that go beyond entertainment. This scoping review describes the literature pertaining to analog serious games and provides recommendations regarding gaps and emerging directions for future research.

Method: The authors conducted a scoping review following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, searching 3 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL) for studies of analog serious games designed for physician-track learners published from January 2013 through December 2023. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts, whereas 1 of 5 authors screened each full text and extracted data from eligible records. The authors iteratively analyzed the data within numerous categories and coded the findings to examine how the field has evolved during the past decade.

Results: The searches retrieved 3,955 records with 865 duplicates. The authors reviewed 3,090 title and abstract records and 202 full-text records. Eighty-eight records met the inclusion criteria, including research reports, conference abstracts, descriptive reports, and short innovation reports. The peak years for publications were 2019 and 2023 (15 publications each). Fewer abstracts and articles were published during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., 2020-2022). The most common scholarship type was description studies (63 [72%]), whereas the dominant game formats were board games (51 [58%]) and card games (33 [38%]). Most studies tested analog serious games with medical students (60 [68%]) and/or residents and fellows (39 [44%]), with numerous studies including mixed study populations.

Conclusions: This scoping review demonstrates moderate growth within the field of analog serious games, along with numerous opportunities for future research. Although analog game-based learning cannot entirely replace traditional pedagogical approaches, analog serious games have potential to meaningfully complement education for physician-track learners in all medical training stages.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
模拟医学教育严肃游戏:范围审查。
目的:严肃游戏越来越多地用于医学教育,以积极吸引学习者。模拟严肃游戏是严肃游戏的一个非数字子集,具有超越娱乐的特定目的。本综述介绍了与模拟严肃游戏相关的文献,并就未来研究的差距和新方向提出了建议:作者按照 Arksey 和 O'Malley 的框架进行了一次范围界定综述,检索了 3 个数据库(MEDLINE、Embase 和 CINAHL)中自 2013 年 1 月至 2023 年 12 月期间发表的有关专为医生学习者设计的模拟严肃游戏的研究。两位作者独立筛选了标题和摘要,而 5 位作者中的一位则筛选了每篇全文,并从符合条件的记录中提取了数据。作者在众多类别中反复分析数据,并对结果进行编码,以研究该领域在过去十年中的发展情况:搜索共检索到 3,955 条记录,其中 865 条重复。作者审查了 3,090 条标题和摘要记录以及 202 条全文记录。88条记录符合纳入标准,包括研究报告、会议摘要、描述性报告和简短的创新报告。发表论文的高峰年份是 2019 年和 2023 年(各发表 15 篇论文)。在 COVID-19 流行初期(即 2020-2022 年)发表的摘要和文章较少。最常见的学术类型是描述性研究(63 [72%]),而主要的游戏形式是棋盘游戏(51 [58%])和纸牌游戏(33 [38%])。大多数研究对医学生(60 [68%])和/或住院医师和研究员(39 [44%])进行了模拟严肃游戏测试,许多研究还包括混合研究人群:本次范围界定综述表明,模拟严肃游戏领域正在适度发展,同时也为未来的研究提供了大量机会。虽然基于模拟游戏的学习不能完全取代传统的教学方法,但模拟严肃游戏有可能对所有医学培训阶段的医师学习者的教育起到有意义的补充作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
期刊最新文献
Validating the 2023 Association of American Medical Colleges Graduate Medical Education Leadership Competencies. World Federation for Medical Education Recognizes 5 International Accrediting Bodies. Irony. Teaching Opportunities for Postgraduate Trainees in Primary Care. How Many Is Too Many? Using Cognitive Load Theory to Determine the Maximum Safe Number of Inpatient Consultations for Trainees.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1