Effects of Serious Games for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of serious games for rehabilitation has been an emerging intervention in health care fields, referred to as an entertaining and positive activity. Although related studies have been conducted on patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a more comprehensive study that summarizes and evaluates its effects in this area is needed. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to systematically evaluate the effects of serious games in promoting rehabilitation and related outcome measures of serious game-based engagement in patients with COPD. METHODS: This review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Searches were performed in the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Embase (via Ovid), CINAHL, Science Direct, and China Biology Medicine disc. Only quantitative studies were included in this review, and the methodological quality and bias of the included studies were evaluated using related tools. Several outcomes, including clinical outcomes and serious game-based engagement outcomes, were ultimately collected in this review. The results were summarized and evaluated using descriptive methods due to significant heterogeneity. RESULTS: In total, 11 studies were included. Serious games played a potentially positive effect on pulmonary function and exercise capacity. However, no consistent findings were reported on dyspnea and psychological status. Additionally, serious game engagement showed favorable findings on adherence, enjoyment, and acceptability. Furthermore, no serious adverse effects were identified in all included studies. CONCLUSIONS: This review preliminarily indicated the potential benefits of serious games in promoting rehabilitation for patients with COPD, despite the limited quality of the included studies. More studies with high methodological quality are needed to further explore the effects of serious games in this field.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".