A systematic review of serious games in medical education: quality of evidence and pedagogical strategy

被引:209
作者
Gorbanev, Iouri [1 ]
Agudelo-Londono, Sandra [2 ]
Gonzalez, Rafael A. [3 ]
Cortes, Ariel [4 ]
Pomares, Alexandra [3 ]
Delgadillo, Vivian [5 ]
Yepes, Francisco J. [2 ]
Munoz, Oscar [5 ]
机构
[1] Pontificia Univ Javeriana, Econ & Management Sch, Bogota, DC, Colombia
[2] Pontificia Univ Javeriana, Publ Hlth Inst, Bogota, Colombia
[3] Pontificia Univ Javeriana, Engn Sch, Bogota, Colombia
[4] Pontificia Univ Javeriana, Econ & Management Sci Sch, Bogota, Colombia
[5] Pontificia Univ Javeriana, Med Sch, Bogota, Colombia
关键词
Video games; medical education; evidence-based practice; comparative effectiveness research; review; SURGICAL SKILLS; GAMIFICATION; PHYSIOLOGY; SIMULATOR; TAXONOMY; PROGRAM;
D O I
10.1080/10872981.2018.1438718
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Introduction: The literature shows an optimistic landscape for the effectiveness of games in medical education. Nevertheless, games are not considered mainstream material in medical teaching. Two research questions that arise are the following: What pedagogical strategies do developers use when creating games for medical education? And what is the quality of the evidence on the effectiveness of games? Methods: A systematic review was made by a multi-disciplinary team of researchers following the Cochrane Collaboration Guidelines. We included peer-reviewed journal articles which described or assessed the use of serious games or gamified apps in medical education. We used the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) to assess the quality of evidence in the use of games. We also evaluated the pedagogical perspectives of such articles. Results: Even though game developers claim that games are useful pedagogical tools, the evidence on their effectiveness is moderate, as assessed by the MERSQI score. Behaviourism and cognitivism continue to be the predominant pedagogical strategies, and games are complementary devices that do not replace traditional medical teaching tools. Medical educators prefer simulations and quizzes focused on knowledge retention and skill development through repetition and do not demand the use of sophisticated games in their classrooms. Moreover, public access to medical games is limited. Discussion: Our aim was to put the pedagogical strategy into dialogue with the evidence on the effectiveness of the use of medical games. This makes sense since the practical use of games depends on the quality of the evidence about their effectiveness. Moreover, recognition of said pedagogical strategy would allow game developers to design more robust games which would greatly contribute to the learning process.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]   Assessment of educational games for health professions: A systematic review of trends and outcomes [J].
Abdulmajed, Hind ;
Park, Yoon Soo ;
Tekian, Ara .
MEDICAL TEACHER, 2015, 37 :S27-S32
[2]   The effect of educational games on medical students' learning outcomes: A systematic review: BEME Guide No 14 [J].
Akl, Elie A. ;
Pretorius, Richard W. ;
Sackett, Kay ;
Erdley, W. Scott ;
Bhoopathi, Paranthaman S. ;
Alfarah, Ziad ;
Schuenemann, Holger J. .
MEDICAL TEACHER, 2010, 32 (01) :16-27
[3]   Assessing the effectiveness of digital game-based learning: Best practices [J].
All, Anissa ;
Castellar, Elena Patricia Nunez ;
Van Looy, Jan .
COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2016, 92-93 :90-103
[4]  
[Anonymous], CONFRONTING CHALLENG
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2013, PLoS ONE
[6]   Toward a Taxonomy Linking Game Attributes to Learning: An Empirical Study [J].
Bedwell, Wendy L. ;
Pavlas, Davin ;
Heyne, Kyle ;
Lazzara, Elizabeth H. ;
Salas, Eduardo .
SIMULATION & GAMING, 2012, 43 (06) :729-760
[7]  
Bergeron, 2006, DEV SERIOUS GAMES, P398
[8]  
Bloom B.S., 1972, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain
[9]  
Boeder N, 2013, GMS Z MED AUSBILD, V30, P1
[10]   Enhancing learning through optimal sequencing of web-based and manikin simulators to teach shock physiology in the medical curriculum [J].
Cendan, Juan C. ;
Johnson, Teresa R. .
ADVANCES IN PHYSIOLOGY EDUCATION, 2011, 35 (04) :402-407