Game jams for cultural safety training in Colombian medical education: a pilot randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Explore the acceptability and feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess game jams-participatory events to cocreate digital or board games in a time-constrained environment-in cultural safety training of medical students. The pilot tests methods and procedures and explores the validity and reliability of our research instrument. DESIGN: Two-arm parallel-group pilot RCT with a 1:1 allocation ratio. SETTING: Faculty of Medicine in Chia, Colombia. PARTICIPANTS: 79 final-year medical students completed the baseline questionnaire. 64 completed the assessment immediately after the intervention: 31 in the intervention group (20 female) and 33 in the control group (18 female). 35 completed the final assessment (18 control and 17 intervention) 4 months after the intervention. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention group joined a 5-hour game jam composed of a 1-hour lecture and a 4-hour session to create and to play educational games about cultural safety. The control group had a 1-hour conventional lesson, followed by a 4-hour study session of selected readings on cultural safety. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The instrument, an online self-administered Likert-type questionnaire, assessed a self-reported cultural safety results chain based on a planned behaviour theory. Student recruitment, retention and perception of the activity determined acceptability. The methodological and logistical factors for a full-scale study determined feasibility. RESULTS: After the intervention, students randomised to that arm reported a slightly higher cultural safety score (26.9) than those in the control group (25.9) (difference -1, 95% CI -3.0 to 1.0). Students described game jam learning in favourable terms and considered cultural safety training relevant. The university authorised the conduct of the full-scale trial. CONCLUSION: Game jam learning is feasible and acceptable for cultural safety training of Colombian medical students. Researchers and educators may find our results informative in the design of RCTs assessing educational interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14261595 (stage: pilot study results).
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".