The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A systematic review of serious games in medical education: quality of evidence and pedagogical strategy
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956) · Cited by 9,342
Kapp, K. M. (2012) · Cited by 3,753
A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games
Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004 · Cited by 2,890
Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century
Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robison, A. J. (2009) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/8435.001.0001 · Cited by 2,258
Confronting the challenges of participatory cultures (media education for the 21st century)
Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robison, A. J. (2009) · Cited by 1,563
An ERP study on L2 syntax processing: When do learners fail?
Meulman, N., Stowe, L. A., Sprenger, S. A., Bresser, M., & Schmid, M. S. (2014) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01072 · Cited by 1,001
Developing a Theory of Gamified Learning: Linking Serious Games and Gamification of Learning
Landers, R. N. (2014) · Simulation & Gaming · doi:10.1177/1046878114563660 · Cited by 918
Systematic review of serious games for medical education and surgical skills training
Graafland, M., Schraagen, J. M., & Schijven, M. P. (2012) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.8819 · Cited by 676
E-learning in medical education in resource constrained low- and middle-income countries
Frehywot, S., Vovides, Y., Talib, Z., Mikhail, N., Ross, H., Wohltjen, H., Bedada, S., Korhumel, K., Koumare, A. K., & Scott, J. (2013) · Human Resources for Health · doi:10.1186/1478-4491-11-4 · Cited by 559
Toward a Taxonomy Linking Game Attributes to Learning: An Empirical Study
Bedwell, W. L., Pavlas, D., Heyne, K., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2012) · Simulation & Gaming · doi:10.1177/1046878112439444 · Cited by 393
Cited by
Gamification of health professions education: a systematic review
van Gaalen, A. E. J., Brouwer, J., Schönrock-Adema, J., Bouwkamp-Timmer, T., Jaarsma, A. D. C., & Georgiadis, J. R. (2021) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-020-10000-3 · Cited by 625
Yu, Z., Gao, M., & Wang, L. (2021) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/0735633120969214 · Cited by 331
Managing and Controlling Digital Role-Playing Game Elements: A Current State of Affairs
da Rocha Franco, A. D. O., de Carvalho, W. V., da Silva, J. W. F., Maia, J. G. R., & de Castro, M. F. (2024) · Entertainment Computing · doi:10.1016/j.entcom.2024.100708 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Gorbanev, I., Agudelo-Londoño, S., González, R. A., Cortes, A., Pomares, A., Delgadillo, V., Yepes, F. J., & Muñoz, Ó.
- Venue
- Medical Education Online
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1438718
- ISSN
- 1087-2981 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2792311375
- Cited by
- 406
- References
- 45
- FWCI
- 7.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A systematic review of serious games in medical education: quality of evidence and pedagogical strategy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10872981.2018.1438718
- The paper
- Gorbanev, I., Agudelo-Londoño, S., González, R. A., Cortes, A., Pomares, A., Delgadillo, V., Yepes, F. J., & Muñoz, Ó. (2018). A systematic review of serious games in medical education: quality of evidence and pedagogical strategy. Medical Education Online. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2018.1438718
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.