C. Piquer-Martinez , A. Gonzalez-Salgado , M.I. Valverde-Merino , M.J. Zarzuelo , M. Gomez-Guzman
{"title":"Mobile gamification in pharmacy education: A comparative study of learning outcomes and perceptions across gender","authors":"C. Piquer-Martinez , A. Gonzalez-Salgado , M.I. Valverde-Merino , M.J. Zarzuelo , M. Gomez-Guzman","doi":"10.1016/j.cptl.2025.102480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>In the dynamic realm of educational technology, the “Pharmaceutical Care Mobile App (AF-UGR)” mobile application stands as a novel embodiment of gamification.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A controlled trial aimed to evaluate the app's impact on academic performance, satisfaction, and engagement among university students. This study included 239 undergraduate Pharmacy students enrolled in the subject of Pharmaceutical Care. Participants were assigned either to a Control group (traditional practice workbook; <em>n</em> = 151) or an App group (mobile gamified application; <em>n</em> = 88). Academic performance was measured through a standardized multiple-choice written exam based on the Pharmaceutical Care syllabus. Student satisfaction and engagement were assessed using an ad hoc questionnaire combining Likert-scale items (ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree”) and open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, <em>t</em>-tests, and chi-square tests, while qualitative feedback was reviewed to identify perceived strengths and areas for improvement.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Gender-specific differences were observed, with male students more likely to pass the exam when using the app (OR = 6.67, CI95% = 1.72–25.87), whereas female students demonstrated greater success with the traditional practice book (OR = 2.00, CI95% = 1.01–4.03). Despite these variances, the app received high acclaim from students, averaging a score of 4.87 ± 0.40 out of 5.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The use of the app produced academic results comparable to those achieved through traditional methods, with some variation depending on the content area and student profile. While the app did not consistently outperform the traditional practice workbook, it was positively received by students and enhanced the perceived relevance of the practical content. These findings support its role as a complementary, rather than substitute, resource in Pharmacy education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47501,"journal":{"name":"Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning","volume":"17 12","pages":"Article 102480"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877129725002011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
In the dynamic realm of educational technology, the “Pharmaceutical Care Mobile App (AF-UGR)” mobile application stands as a novel embodiment of gamification.
Methods
A controlled trial aimed to evaluate the app's impact on academic performance, satisfaction, and engagement among university students. This study included 239 undergraduate Pharmacy students enrolled in the subject of Pharmaceutical Care. Participants were assigned either to a Control group (traditional practice workbook; n = 151) or an App group (mobile gamified application; n = 88). Academic performance was measured through a standardized multiple-choice written exam based on the Pharmaceutical Care syllabus. Student satisfaction and engagement were assessed using an ad hoc questionnaire combining Likert-scale items (ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree”) and open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-tests, and chi-square tests, while qualitative feedback was reviewed to identify perceived strengths and areas for improvement.
Results
Gender-specific differences were observed, with male students more likely to pass the exam when using the app (OR = 6.67, CI95% = 1.72–25.87), whereas female students demonstrated greater success with the traditional practice book (OR = 2.00, CI95% = 1.01–4.03). Despite these variances, the app received high acclaim from students, averaging a score of 4.87 ± 0.40 out of 5.
Conclusion
The use of the app produced academic results comparable to those achieved through traditional methods, with some variation depending on the content area and student profile. While the app did not consistently outperform the traditional practice workbook, it was positively received by students and enhanced the perceived relevance of the practical content. These findings support its role as a complementary, rather than substitute, resource in Pharmacy education.