MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4403425078 · doi:10.2196/54968

Serious Game Development for Public Health: Participatory Design Approach to COVID-19 Quarantine Policy Education

2024· article· en· W4403425078 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Myunghwan Kwak, Byeong-Je Kim, Ji‐Bum Chung

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Serious Games · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueEducational Games and Gamification
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDistancingSocial distancePublic relationsGame theoryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Process (computing)Game designCitizen journalismComputer scienceKnowledge managementManagement sciencePolitical scienceMedicineEngineeringEconomicsMultimediaInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Public health education plays a crucial role in effectively addressing infectious diseases such as COVID-19. However, existing educational materials often provide only foundational information, and traditional group education faces challenges due to social distancing policies. Objective: Addressing these gaps, our study introduces a serious game called "Flattening the Curve." This interactive experience immerses learners in the role of quarantine policy managers, offering unique insights into the effects and challenges of social distancing policies. Methods: The development of the game adhered to the SERES framework, ensuring a scientifically designed foundation. To achieve its learning objectives, the game incorporated learning and game mechanics including an agent-based infection model, a social distancing policy model, and an economic model, which were developed based on previous literature. After defining a broad concept of scientific and design foundations, we used a participatory design process. This study included 16 undergraduates and took place over one semester. Participants played the game, gave feedback, and answered surveys. The game was improved based on participants' feedback throughout the process. Participants' feedback was analyzed based on the Design, Play, and Experience framework. Surveys were conducted before and after the activity and analyzed to assess participants' evaluation of and satisfaction with the game. Results: The game successfully achieved its learning objectives, encompassing a comprehensive understanding of infectious disease characteristics; the disease transmission process; the necessity and efficacy of quarantine policies and their delicate balance with economic factors; and the concept of flattening the curve. To achieve this, the game includes the following: (1) an agent-based infection model based on the modified Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Hospitalized-Recovered (SEIHR) model with five infectious disease scenarios; (2) a quarantine policy model with social distancing, travel control, and intensive care unit management; and (3) an economic model that allows users to consider the impact of quarantine policies on a community's economy. In response to participatory design feedback, the game underwent meticulous modifications, including refining game systems, parameters, design elements, the user interface, and interactions. Key feedback included requests for more scenarios and engaging yet simple game elements, as well as suggestions for improving the scoring system and design features. Notably, concerns about the fairness of the outcome evaluation system (star rating system), which could incentivize prioritizing economic activity over minimizing casualties, were raised and addressed by replacing the star rating system with a progress-based vaccine development system. Quantitative evaluation results reflect participants' positive assessments of the game through the learner-centric approach. Conclusions: The serious game "Flattening the Curve," developed through a participatory design approach, emerges as a valuable tool for public health education, particularly concerning social distancing policies. The game and its source code are openly accessible online, enabling widespread use for research and educational purposes.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,739
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,177
Tête enseignante GPT0,445
Écart entre enseignants0,267 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Serious GamesMême sujetEducational Games and GamificationTravaux en français237 207