1 Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Toronto, Mississauga, Canada.
2 Faculty of Engineering, Environment, and Computing, School of Computing, Electronics, and Mathematics, Coventry University, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Games Health J. 2019 Apr;8(2):85-100. doi: 10.1089/g4h.2018.0017. Epub 2018 Sep 25.
Nondigital board games are being used to engage players and impact outcomes in health and medicine across diverse populations and contexts. This systematic review and meta-analysis describes and summarizes their impact based on randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials. An electronic search resulted in a review of n = 21 eligible studies. Sample sizes ranged from n = 17 to n = 3110 (n = 6554 total participants). A majority of the board game interventions focused on education to increase health-related knowledge and behaviors (76%, n = 16). Outcomes evaluated included self-efficacy, attitudes/beliefs, biological health indicators, social functioning, anxiety, and executive functioning, in addition to knowledge and behaviors. Using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing bias, most studies (52%, n = 11) had an unclear risk of bias (33% [n = 7] had a high risk and 14% [n = 3] had a low risk). Statistical tests of publication bias were not significant. A random-effects meta-analysis showed a large average effect of board games on health-related knowledge (d* = 0.82, 95% confidence interval; CI [0.15-1.48]), a small-to-moderate effect on behaviors (d* = 0.33, 95% CI [0.16-0.51]), and a small-to-moderate effect on biological health indicators (d* = 0.37, 95% CI [0.21-0.52]). The findings contribute to the literature on games and gamified approaches in healthcare. Future research efforts should aim for more consistent high scientific standards in their evaluation protocols and reporting methodologies to provide a stronger evidence base.
非数字棋盘游戏被用于吸引参与者,并在不同人群和背景下影响健康和医学领域的结果。本系统评价和荟萃分析描述并总结了基于随机和非随机对照试验的这些影响。电子搜索共审查了 21 项符合条件的研究。样本量范围从 n=17 到 n=3110(n=6554 名总参与者)。大多数棋盘游戏干预措施侧重于教育,以增加与健康相关的知识和行为(76%,n=16)。评估的结果包括自我效能感、态度/信念、生物健康指标、社会功能、焦虑和执行功能,以及知识和行为。使用 Cochrane 协作组评估偏倚的工具,大多数研究(52%,n=11)存在不确定的偏倚风险(33%[n=7]存在高风险,14%[n=3]存在低风险)。发表偏倚的统计检验不显著。随机效应荟萃分析显示,棋盘游戏对健康相关知识有较大的平均影响(d*=0.82,95%置信区间;CI [0.15-1.48]),对行为有较小到中等的影响(d*=0.33,95%CI [0.16-0.51]),对生物健康指标有较小到中等的影响(d*=0.37,95%CI [0.21-0.52])。这些发现为游戏和医疗保健中的游戏化方法的文献做出了贡献。未来的研究工作应努力在评估方案和报告方法中达到更一致的高科学标准,以提供更强的证据基础。