Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 2, 2025

The Dyspepsia Educational Tool As a Novel Aid in Dyspepsia Management
Published on: June 29, 2019
Caution with competitive gamification in medical education: unexpected results of a randomised cross-over study
Jacqueline Kirsch1, Cord Spreckelsen2
1Medical Clinic, Luisenhospital, Boxgraben 99, 52064, Aachen, Germany. jacqueline.kirsch@rwth-aachen.de.
Background:
To intrinsically motivate students in the long term, longitudinal e-learning systems combined with repeated testing and competitive gamification seem promising. The effects of this approach have never been closely examined in the field of evidence-based medicine. The authors investigated if a simple, competitive learning application enhances students' risk competence and intrinsic motivation.
Methods:
Participants were 5.-9. semester medical students (n = 48), recruited in an elective evidence-based medicine subject and randomly distributed to two groups (group 1: n = 23; group 2: n = 25). Both accessed a competitive evidence-based medicine quiz game. Following a cross-over design, each group practiced with one of two thematically different questionnaires A or B, before the allocation switched after one month. To analyse whether there was a measurable learning effect in the practiced topics, a paired t-test was performed with quantitative data from 3 e-tests. Students further reported their experience in evaluation surveys.
Results:
Students' improvements in e-test scores after training with the corresponding topics in the learning application can be attributed to chance. Even though the majority enjoyed playing and felt motivated to study, they invested a minimum of time and rejected competition.
Conclusion:
The authors found no evidence for benefits of the investigated learning programme on students' risk competence or on their internal motivation. The majority disapproved the competitive concept, indicating adverse side effects of the applied gamification element. To intrinsically motivate more students, prospective learning programmes should favour complex and collaborative programmes over simple and competitive ones.
Related Concept Videos
Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
Blinding
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...

