↓ Skip to main content

Serious electronic games as behavioural change interventions in healthcare-associated infections and infection prevention and control: a scoping review of the literature and future directions

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
44 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Serious electronic games as behavioural change interventions in healthcare-associated infections and infection prevention and control: a scoping review of the literature and future directions
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13756-016-0137-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Enrique Castro-Sánchez, Yiannis Kyratsis, Michiyo Iwami, Timothy M. Rawson, Alison H. Holmes

Abstract

The uptake of improvement initiatives in infection prevention and control (IPC) has often proven challenging. Innovative interventions such as 'serious games' have been proposed in other areas to educate and help clinicians adopt optimal behaviours. There is limited evidence about the application and evaluation of serious games in IPC. The purposes of the study were: a) to synthesise research evidence on the use of serious games in IPC to support healthcare workers' behaviour change and best practice learning; and b) to identify gaps across the formulation and evaluation of serious games in IPC. A scoping study was conducted using the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. We interrogated electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase Classic + Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar) in December 2015. Evidence from these studies was assessed against an analytic framework of intervention formulation and evaluation. Nine hundred sixty five unique papers were initially identified, 23 included for full-text review, and four finally selected. Studies focused on intervention inception and development rather than implementation. Expert involvement in game design was reported in 2/4 studies. Potential game users were not included in needs assessment and game development. Outcome variables such as fidelity or sustainability were scarcely reported. The growing interest in serious games for health has not been coupled with adequate evaluation of processes, outcomes and contexts involved. Explanations about the mechanisms by which game components may facilitate behaviour change are lacking, further hindering adoption.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Finland 1 <1%
Unknown 122 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 15%
Student > Master 18 14%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 31 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 17 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 12%
Psychology 11 9%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Other 31 25%
Unknown 37 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,060,635
of 25,918,104 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#84
of 1,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,242
of 329,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,104 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.