Unlocking knowledge: a meta-analysis assessing the efficacy of educational escape rooms in health sciences education.

IF 3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Nicholas J Kakos,Rebecca S Lufler,Brendan Cyr,Christian Zwirner,Erin Hurley,Christina Heinrich,Adam B Wilson
{"title":"Unlocking knowledge: a meta-analysis assessing the efficacy of educational escape rooms in health sciences education.","authors":"Nicholas J Kakos,Rebecca S Lufler,Brendan Cyr,Christian Zwirner,Erin Hurley,Christina Heinrich,Adam B Wilson","doi":"10.1007/s10459-024-10373-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Educational escape rooms within health sciences education are gaining traction as a unique and engaging game-based strategy for reviewing instructional content. Educational escape rooms cultivate valuable skills such as teamwork, communication, creativity, attention to detail, and the ability to apply knowledge under time pressures. While several studies have independently assessed learners' knowledge gains after educational escape room interventions, the present work meta-analyzes the efficacy of educational escape rooms across studies and student learners within health sciences education. A systematic search across seven databases was performed by a health sciences librarian from inception to March 24, 2023. Record screenings, full-text reviews, and data extractions were managed within Covidence. MERSQI criteria were used to assess study quality. Pooled effect sizes (Standardized Mean Differences = SMD) were estimated through meta-analysis to summarize learner performance outcomes after educational escape room interventions. Eleven studies followed a longitudinal pretest-posttest design, and five studies followed a control-treatment group design. Learners' posttest scores after participating in an educational escape room were statistically higher than their pretest scores as indicated by a large positive summary effect size (SMD ≥ 0.893; p <0.001). Educational escape rooms were also effective for treatment group participants (n = 508), who significantly outperformed (SMD = 0.616; p <0.001) control group participants (n = 555). Most escape rooms were employed as a mechanism for reviewing educational content. This meta-analytic review suggests escape rooms are effective educational interventions for increasing knowledge gains among health sciences learners and highlights common implementation practices to help guide educators interested in this game-based learning approach.","PeriodicalId":50959,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Health Sciences Education","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Health Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-024-10373-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Educational escape rooms within health sciences education are gaining traction as a unique and engaging game-based strategy for reviewing instructional content. Educational escape rooms cultivate valuable skills such as teamwork, communication, creativity, attention to detail, and the ability to apply knowledge under time pressures. While several studies have independently assessed learners' knowledge gains after educational escape room interventions, the present work meta-analyzes the efficacy of educational escape rooms across studies and student learners within health sciences education. A systematic search across seven databases was performed by a health sciences librarian from inception to March 24, 2023. Record screenings, full-text reviews, and data extractions were managed within Covidence. MERSQI criteria were used to assess study quality. Pooled effect sizes (Standardized Mean Differences = SMD) were estimated through meta-analysis to summarize learner performance outcomes after educational escape room interventions. Eleven studies followed a longitudinal pretest-posttest design, and five studies followed a control-treatment group design. Learners' posttest scores after participating in an educational escape room were statistically higher than their pretest scores as indicated by a large positive summary effect size (SMD ≥ 0.893; p <0.001). Educational escape rooms were also effective for treatment group participants (n = 508), who significantly outperformed (SMD = 0.616; p <0.001) control group participants (n = 555). Most escape rooms were employed as a mechanism for reviewing educational content. This meta-analytic review suggests escape rooms are effective educational interventions for increasing knowledge gains among health sciences learners and highlights common implementation practices to help guide educators interested in this game-based learning approach.
开启知识之门:评估教育逃生室在健康科学教育中的功效的荟萃分析。
健康科学教育中的教育逃生室作为一种独特的、以游戏为基础的复习教学内容的策略,正受到越来越多的关注。教育性密室能培养学生的宝贵技能,如团队合作、沟通、创造力、对细节的关注以及在时间压力下应用知识的能力。有几项研究独立评估了学习者在教育性密室干预后获得的知识,而本研究则对教育性密室在健康科学教育领域的研究和学生学习者之间的功效进行了元分析。一位健康科学图书管理员对七个数据库进行了系统检索,检索时间从开始到 2023 年 3 月 24 日。记录筛选、全文审阅和数据提取均在 Covidence 中进行管理。采用 MERSQI 标准评估研究质量。通过荟萃分析估算了汇总效应大小(标准化均值差异 = SMD),以总结逃生室教育干预后学习者的表现结果。有 11 项研究采用了纵向的前测-后测设计,有 5 项研究采用了对照-治疗组设计。参加教育性密室逃脱后,学习者的后测成绩在统计学上高于前测成绩,这体现在巨大的正效应大小(SMD ≥ 0.893; p <0.001)。教育逃生室对治疗组参与者(508 人)也很有效,他们的成绩明显优于对照组参与者(555 人)(SMD = 0.616;P <0.001)。大多数逃生室被用作审查教育内容的机制。这项荟萃分析综述表明,逃生室是提高健康科学学习者知识收益的有效教育干预措施,并强调了常见的实施方法,以帮助指导对这种基于游戏的学习方法感兴趣的教育者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
86
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Health Sciences Education is a forum for scholarly and state-of-the art research into all aspects of health sciences education. It will publish empirical studies as well as discussions of theoretical issues and practical implications. The primary focus of the Journal is linking theory to practice, thus priority will be given to papers that have a sound theoretical basis and strong methodology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信