Use of a Serious Game to Teach Infectious Disease Management in Medical School: Effectiveness and Transfer to a Clinical Examination.
Item Response Theory
medical education
objective structured clinical examination
serious game
teaching
Journal
Frontiers in medicine
ISSN: 2296-858X
Titre abrégé: Front Med (Lausanne)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101648047
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
27
01
2022
accepted:
23
03
2022
entrez:
13
5
2022
pubmed:
14
5
2022
medline:
14
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Physicians of all specialties must be familiar with important principles of infectious diseases, but curricular time for this content is limited and clinical teaching requires considerable resources in terms of available patients and teachers. Serious games are scalable interventions that can help standardize teaching. This study assessed whether knowledge and skills acquired in a serious game translate to better performance in a clinical examination. Fifth-year undergraduate medical students ( Higher exposure to virtual patients in the serious game did not result in superior OSCE scores. However, there was good agreement between student performance in the OSCE and in game logfiles ( Repeated exposure to virtual patients with infectious diseases in a serious game did not directly impact on exam performance but game logfiles might be good and resource-sparing indicators of student ability. One advantage of using serious games in medical education is standardized content, a lower inhibition threshold to learn, and a need of less staff time compared to small-group clinical teaching.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35547200
doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.863764
pmc: PMC9082676
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
863764Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Aster, Scheithauer, Middeke, Zegota, Clauberg, Artelt, Schuelper and Raupach.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 11;13(9):e0203851
pubmed: 30204773
Simul Healthc. 2020 Apr;15(2):75-81
pubmed: 32044851
Clin Infect Dis. 2007 Mar 1;44 Suppl 2:S27-72
pubmed: 17278083
Med Educ. 2009 Aug;43(8):784-9
pubmed: 19659492
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2013 Aug;18(3):409-25
pubmed: 22618856
Acad Med. 2010 Jul;85(7):1118-24
pubmed: 20603909
BMC Med. 2013 Mar 05;11:61
pubmed: 23497243
Psicothema. 2017 Nov;29(4):552-557
pubmed: 29048317
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2015 Mar;20(1):149-61
pubmed: 24838598
Circulation. 2015 Oct 13;132(15):1435-86
pubmed: 26373316
Eur Heart J. 2015 Nov 21;36(44):3075-3128
pubmed: 26320109
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2006 Sep;1(3):181-210
pubmed: 26151629
Int J Med Inform. 2020 Apr;136:104074
pubmed: 31926355
BMC Med Educ. 2021 Mar 30;21(1):189
pubmed: 33785000
JMIR Serious Games. 2020 Dec 3;8(4):e24986
pubmed: 33242312
Med Educ. 2014 Sep;48(9):870-83
pubmed: 25113114