A serious game simulation complementing CPR instruction improved theoretical knowledge but not CPR skills¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the Boada et al. trial included in the review, LISSA serious-game groups improved knowledge while no skill differences emerged between groups. → García-Suárez 2019

Evidence¶

García-Suárez 2019¶

García-Suárez, M., Méndez-Martínez, C., Martínez-Isasi, S., Gómez-Salgado, J., & Fernández-García, D. (2019). Basic Life Support Training Methods for Health Science Students: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16050768

q2 · i? · review · r2

Review's summary of the serious-game trial (LISSA-2 groups vs control groups, nursing students in Norway, n = 109): "Improved knowledge among those belonging to LISSA groups" but no skill differences; the original authors judged it supports theory only.

"Improved knowledge among those belonging to LISSA groups. In terms of skills, there were no differences between the groups. They conclude that this is a good method to support theory but that it does not improve skills."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The review reports that simulation games support near transfer of knowledge but evidence for long-term or far transfer is less robust — a broader claim this one bears on
• The review reports that students learning with serious games often perform better on content knowledge assessments than those in traditional settings — a broader claim this one bears on
• Voice advisory mannequin training produces better CPR skill acquisition than other training resources among health science students, though not in every comparison — related