Bhoopathi P S, Sheoran R
Academic Unit of Psychiatry, 15, Hyde Terrace, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK, LS2 9LT.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Apr 19;2006(2):CD001471. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001471.pub2.
In traditional didactic teaching, the learner has a passive role, digesting the knowledge presented by the teacher. Stimulating and active teaching processes may be better at instilling information than more pedestrian approaches. Games involving repetition, reinforcement, association and use of multiple senses have been proposed as part of experiential learning.
To assess the effects of educational games on the knowledge and clinical skill of mental health professionals compared to the effects of standard teaching approaches.
We performed electronic searches of AMED (1998 - November 2005), British Nursing Index (November 2005), Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2005), Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (November 2005), CINAHL (November 2005) EMBASE (November 2005), Educational Resources Information Centre on CSA (1966 - November 2005), MEDLINE (November 2005), PsycINFO (November 2005). We also searched references of all selected articles and contacted authors of included trials for more information.
Randomised controlled trials comparing any educational game aiming at increasing knowledge and/or skills with a standard educational approach for mental health professionals.
We extracted data independently and analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. We analysed the individual person data using fixed effect Peto Odds Ratio (OR) calculated the 95% confidence intervals (CI). If appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm (NNH) was estimated. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences.
We identified one trial (n=34) of an educational game for mental health nursing students of only a few hours follow up. For an outcome we arbitrarily defined ('no academically important improvement [a 10% improvement in scores]') those allocated to educational games fared considerably better than students in the standard education techniques group (OR 0.06 CI 0.01 to 0.27, NNT 3 CI 2 to 4). On average those in the games group scored six more points than the control students on a test of questions relevant to psychosis set to the standard of the mental health nursing curriculum of the day (WMD 6 CI 2.63 to 9.37).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current limited evidence suggests educational games could help mental health students gain more points in their tests, especially if they have left revision to the last minute. This salient study should be refined and repeated.
在传统的讲授式教学中，学习者处于被动角色，消化教师传授的知识。与更为普通的教学方法相比，激发性和主动性的教学过程可能在灌输信息方面效果更佳。涉及重复、强化、联想以及运用多种感官的游戏已被提议作为体验式学习的一部分。
与标准教学方法的效果相比，评估教育游戏对心理健康专业人员知识和临床技能的影响。
我们对以下数据库进行了电子检索：医学教育数据库（1998年 - 2005年11月）、英国护理索引（2005年11月）、考克兰图书馆（2005年第3期）、考克兰精神分裂症研究组试验注册库（2005年11月）、护理学与健康领域数据库（2005年11月）、医学与健康数据库（2005年11月）、教育资源信息中心（CSA，1966年 - 2005年11月）、医学索引数据库（2005年11月）、心理学文摘数据库（2005年11月）。我们还检索了所有入选文章的参考文献，并联系了纳入试验的作者以获取更多信息。
比较任何旨在增加知识和/或技能的教育游戏与心理健康专业人员标准教育方法的随机对照试验。
我们独立提取数据并基于意向性分析进行分析。我们使用固定效应佩托比值比（OR）分析个体数据，计算95%置信区间（CI）。若合适，估算治疗所需人数（NNT）或伤害所需人数（NNH）。对于连续性数据，我们计算加权平均差。
我们确定了一项针对心理健康护理专业学生的教育游戏试验（n = 34），随访时间仅数小时。对于我们随意定义的一个结果（“无学术上重要的进步[分数提高10%]”），分配到教育游戏组的学生比标准教育技术组的学生表现要好得多（OR 0.06，CI 0.01至0.27，NNT 3，CI 2至4）。在按照当时心理健康护理课程标准设置的与精神病相关问题的测试中，游戏组学生平均比对照组学生多得了6分（加权平均差6，CI 2.63至9.37）。
目前有限的证据表明教育游戏可帮助心理健康专业学生在测试中获得更多分数，尤其是那些直到最后一刻才进行复习的学生。这项重要的研究应加以完善并重复进行。
