Evaluating the Efficacy of a Serious Game to Deliver Health Education About Invasive Meningococcal Disease: Clustered Randomized Controlled Equivalence Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) is a serious, vaccine-preventable infectious disease that can be life-threatening. Teaching adolescents about the early detection and prevention of IMD can be challenging in a school environment, with educators reporting they lack confidence or expertise to cover this in the classroom environment. Professional guest educators are an alternative to cover specialist topics such as IMD; however, time and resourcing constraints can mean that these educators are not always available. Serious games may be an alternative to face-to-face education, where complex health information may be delivered via self-directed gameplay. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a serious game that can replace a face-to-face educator in a classroom setting to educate adolescents aged 12 years to 15 years. This study evaluates the efficacy of the Meningococcal Immunisation Awareness, Prevention and Protection app (MIApp), a serious game designed to replicate the information provided in a 30-minute face-to-face presentation provided by a trained educator. METHODS: This clustered, randomized controlled equivalence trial involved students (Years 7-10) from 6 secondary schools across metropolitan Western Australia who completed pre- and postintervention questionnaires with a follow-up at 3 months postintervention to measure the primary outcome of IMD knowledge acquisition following this self-guided intervention. The findings were compared with changes in an active control (comparison) group who received an in-class educational presentation about IMD transmission and protection. A questionnaire was developed to assess 9 key areas of knowledge. Median scores for knowledge pre- and postintervention were collected from a self-administered assessment of this questionnaire and, at 3 months postintervention, were compared between groups. A knowledge score of +/-2/16 was determined a priori to meet the criteria for equivalence. Participants who used MIApp were also asked a series of questions to assess the enjoyment of and engagement with the game. RESULTS: Of the 788 participating students, the median postintervention correct score in both the MIApp and control cohorts was 14/16 (87.5% correct responses), compared with the median pre-intervention correct score of 6/16 (37.5% correct responses), representing a significant (P<.001) increase in IMD knowledge in both groups. Improvements were retained in both groups 3 months after the initial intervention (median correct score: 11/16 in the intervention group; 12/16 in the control group; P=.86), demonstrating the efficacy of MIApp to deliver health education about IMD transmission and protection, although response rates in the follow-up cohort were low (255/788, 32.4%). CONCLUSIONS: MIApp met the predetermined threshold for equivalence, demonstrating similar improvements in knowledge posttrial and at the 3-month follow-up. Participating adolescents considered the MIApp game more enjoyable than a presentation, with equivalent improvements in knowledge. Serious games could represent a constructive tool to help teachers impart specialized health education.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».