MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407372876 · doi:10.2196/53735

Utilizing Gamification, Artificial Intelligence, and mHealth for the Professional Development of Maternal Care Providers: Exploratory Pilot Cross-Sectional Study Assessing Providers' Satisfaction in Primary Health Care Centers in Lebanon

2025· article· en· W4407372876 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamad Alameddine, Nadine Sabra, Nour El Arnaout, Asmaa El Dakdouki, Mahmoud El Jaouni, Randa Hamadeh, Abed Shanaa, Shadi Saleh

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Serious Games · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintmHealthExploratory researchPrimary careHealth careNursingMedical educationMedicinePsychologyFamily medicineComputer sciencePsychological interventionPolitical scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: High maternal morbidity and mortality rates globally, especially in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, highlight the critical role of skilled health care providers (HCPs) in preventing pregnancy-related complications among disadvantaged populations. Lebanon, hosting over 1.5 million refugees, is no exception. HCPs face significant challenges, including resource constraints and limited professional development opportunities, underscoring the need for continuous learning and innovative educational interventions. Artificial intelligence (AI) and gamification show promise in enhancing clinical performance and evidence-based practice. Objective: Considering the limited evidence on the effectiveness of integrating gamification and AI in a mobile app for professional development of HCPs providing maternal health services, this pilot study aims to assess the satisfaction and acceptability of HCPs with a novel mLearning tool, titled the "GAIN MHI" app (gamification, artificial intelligence, and mHealth network for maternal health improvement), at selected primary health care centers in Lebanon. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study that presents data collected from 12 participating HCPs, primarily obstetricians and midwives who have been using the GAIN MHI mobile app for professional development and learning. The survey used included Likert scale questions to assess HCPs' satisfaction, engagement, and evaluation of the gamification and AI components of the app. Open-ended questions gathered qualitative feedback on app preferences and potential improvements. Statistical analysis was performed to derive insights from the quantitative data collected. Subsequently, a descriptive analysis was performed, presenting the frequencies and percentages of various participant characteristics, as well as responses to the survey across all sections. Results: A total of 85% (n=10) of the HCPs, including midwives and doctors, were satisfied with the GAIN MHI mobile app, the user interface, and various content features. Engagement levels were robust (64.6%, SD 6.2%), notably impacting clinical routines and theoretical knowledge. The gamification and AI components garnered strong positive feedback, enhancing learning enjoyment (11/12, 92%). From a qualitative perspective, users expressed appreciation for the app's diverse content, user-friendliness, and motivation for continuous learning. Suggestions for expanding the content included a wide range of health topics, highlighting the app's potential applicability in various health care fields. Conclusions: HCPs, especially those practicing in underserved areas, face challenges in accessing professional development opportunities, highlighting the need for innovative pedagogical approaches using mobile technologies. This pilot study underlines the potential of using AI-based digital solutions for professional development with the aim of improving the quality of health services-in this case, maternal health services-through continuous learning and updates on the most recent evidence-based clinical guidelines. Future research should investigate the feasibility of applying similar solutions on a larger scale to reach a wider range of HCPs and cover other health topics. The applicability of such solutions in different contexts and low-resource settings should also be explored.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Serious GamesSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207