Virtual ER, a Serious Game for Interprofessional Education to Enhance Teamwork in Medical and Nursing Undergraduates: Development and Evaluation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Engaging students in interprofessional education for higher order thinking and collaborative problem-solving skills is challenging. This study reports the development of Virtual ER, a serious game played on a virtual platform, and how it can be an innovative way for delivering interprofessional education to medical and nursing undergraduates. OBJECTIVE: We report the development of a serious online game, Virtual ER, and evaluate its effect on teamwork enhancement and clinical competence. We also explore if Virtual ER can be an effective pedagogical tool to engage medical and nursing students with different learning styles. METHODS: Virtual ER is a custom-made, learning outcome-driven, case-based web app. We developed a game performance scoring system with specific mechanisms to enhance serious gaming elements. Sixty-two students were recruited from our medical and nursing programs. They played the games in teams of 4 or 5, followed by an instructor-led debriefing for concept consolidation. Teamwork attitudes, as measured by the Human Factors Attitude Survey, were compared before and after the game. Learning style was measured with a modified Honey and Mumford learning style questionnaire. RESULTS: Students were satisfied with Virtual ER (mean satisfaction score 5.44, SD 0.95, of a possible 7). Overall, Virtual ER enhanced teamwork attitude by 3.02 points (95% CI 1.15-4.88, P=.002). Students with higher scores as activists (estimate 9.09, 95% CI 5.17-13.02, P<.001) and pragmatists (estimate 5.69, 95% CI 1.18-10.20, P=.01) had a significantly higher degree of teamwork attitude enhancement, while students with higher scores as theorists and reflectors did not demonstrate significant changes. However, there was no difference in game performance scores between students with different learning styles. CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable teamwork enhancement after playing Virtual ER for interprofessional education, in particular for students who had activist or pragmatist learning styles. Serious online games have potential in interprofessional education for the development of 21st century life skills. Our findings also suggest that Virtual ER for interprofessional education delivery could be expanded locally and globally.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".