A Mobile Serious Game About the Pandemic (COVID-19 - Did You Know?): Design and Evaluation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No treatment for COVID-19 is yet available; therefore, providing access to information about SARS-CoV-2, the transmission route of the virus, and ways to prevent the spread of infection is a critical sanitary measure worldwide. Serious games have advantages in the dissemination of reliable information during the pandemic; they can provide qualified content while offering interactivity to the user, and they have great reach over the internet. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a serious game with the purpose of providing science-based information on the prevention of COVID-19 and personal care during the pandemic while assessing players' knowledge about COVID-19-related topics. METHODS: The study was conducted with the interdisciplinary collaboration of specialists in health sciences, computing, and design at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. The health recommendations were grouped into six thematic blocks, presented in a quiz format. The software languages were based on the progressive web app development methodology with the Ionic framework, JavaScript, HTML5, cascading style sheets, and TypeScript (Angular). Open data reports of how users interact with the serious game were obtained using the Google Analytics application programming interface. The visual identity, logo, infographics, and icons were carefully developed by considering a selection of colors, typography, sounds, and images that are suitable for young audiences. Cards with cartoon characters were introduced at the end of each thematic topic to interact with the player, reinforcing their correct answers or alerting them to the need to learn more about the disease. The players' performance was assessed by the rate of incorrect and correct answers and analyzed by linear correlation coefficient over 7 weeks. The agile SCRUM development methodology enabled quick and daily interactions of developers through a webchat and sequential team meetings. RESULTS: The game "COVID-19-Did You Know?" was made available for free on a public university website on April 1, 2020. The game had been accessed 17,571 times as of September 2020. Dissemination actions such as reports on social media and television showed a temporal correspondence with the access number. The players' error rate in the topic "Mask" showed a negative trend (r=-.83; P=.01) over the weeks of follow-up. The other topics showed no significant trend over the weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The gamification strategy for health education content on the theme of COVID-19 reached a young audience, which is considered to be a priority in the strategy of orientation toward social distancing. Specific educational reinforcement measures were proposed and implemented based on the players' performance. The improvement in the users' performance on the topic about the use of masks may reflect an increase in information about or adherence to mask use over time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".