新冠病毒感染时代医学生通过严肃游戏进行的评估

Medical students' evaluation by serious game in the era of Covid-19 infection.

作者信息

Chamtouri Ikram, Kechida Melek, Jomaa Walid, Ben Hamda Khaldoun

机构信息

Cardiology B Department, Fattouma Bourguiba University Hospital and University of Monastir.

Internal Medicine and Endocrinology Department, Fattouma Bourguiba University Hospital and University of Monastir.

出版信息

Tunis Med. 2025 Feb 5;103(2):194-198. doi: 10.62438/tunismed.v103i2.5012.

DOI:10.62438/tunismed.v103i2.5012

PMID:40096717

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12034366/

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Simulation using serious games (SG) has emerged in the field of training and assessment of medical students.

AIM

to compare the results of medical students' evaluation by virtual simulation using online SG and clinical case-based multiple-choice questions (MCQ), and to assess the degree of satisfaction with these two evaluation methods.

METHODS

Medical students from the same level of study participated in this study. SG group had an evaluation by SG dealing with "diagnosis and management of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). MCQ group was evaluated by clinical case-based MCQ having the same topic as SG group. Results of the two groups were compared. A satisfaction questionnaire was filled out by the two groups. The satisfaction degree was compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 64 medical students (G1:31 and G2: 33) were enrolled. Thirty learners (96.8%) in SG group obtained a total score ≥ 50% versus 69.7% in clinical case-based MCQ group (p = 0.004). The full score was obtained by three learners in SG group; however, no student scored 100% in clinical case-based MCQ group (p = 0.027). Medical evaluation using SG was reported to be more innovative, fun, and realistic compared to evaluation by clinical case-based MCQ.

CONCLUSION

Simulation by SG could be an innovative and effective method in evaluating medical students.

摘要

引言

使用严肃游戏（SG）进行模拟已出现在医学生培训和评估领域。

目的

比较使用在线严肃游戏进行虚拟模拟与基于临床病例的多项选择题（MCQ）对医学生的评估结果，并评估对这两种评估方法的满意度。

方法

来自同一学习水平的医学生参与了本研究。SG组通过处理“ST段抬高型心肌梗死（STEMI）的诊断和管理”的严肃游戏进行评估。MCQ组通过与SG组主题相同的基于临床病例的MCQ进行评估。比较两组结果。两组填写了满意度问卷。比较两组之间的满意度。

结果

共招募了64名医学生（G1：31名和G2：33名）。SG组30名学习者（96.8%）获得总分≥50%，而基于临床病例的MCQ组为69.7%（p = 0.004）。SG组有三名学习者获得满分；然而，基于临床病例的MCQ组没有学生得100分（p = 0.027）。据报道，与基于临床病例的MCQ评估相比，使用SG进行医学评估更具创新性、趣味性和现实性。