BACKGROUND: Although educators agree that the approach to cancer management must be multidisciplinary, medical students usually observe cancer patients through the eyes of a single specialist at any given time. METHODS: In order to teach third-year medical students that cancer management is multidisciplinary, we developed the Oncology Game, an interactive, computer-assisted board game built on the principles of self-directed learning and student-student interaction. Eight "patients" with different histologic types of cancer are distributed randomly to 4 students, who play in teams of 2. The object is for the team to obtain the best treatment for its patients by advancing them via a roll of dice through surgical, medical, and radiation oncology clinics in the order most logical for the patient's particular cancer type. To test improvement in cognitive skills as a function of play, 16 students participated in a tournament taking parallel pretest and posttests before and after each round of play. RESULTS: Students demonstrated a statistically significant change in the total number of questions answered correctly each time they played the Oncology Game (F = 4.16, P = 0.018; Pretest Round 1: 8.88 +/- 0.58; Posttest Round 1: 9.63 +/- 0.42; Pretest Round 2: 10.75 +/- 0.62; Posttest Round 2: 11.5 +/- 0.85). Post hoc pairwise comparison revealed a significant improvement in student performance after playing two rounds of the Oncology Game. Based on the postgame survey, students felt they improved their understanding of oncologic principles (4.56 +/- 0.13), knowledge of malignancies (4.50 +/- 0.13), and appreciation for the multidisciplinary nature of cancer management (4.56 +/- 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Improved test scores and postgame survey results demonstrate that third-year medical student students can learn about basic oncology principles and gain an appreciation for oncology as a multidisciplinary field of medicine through an interactive, computer-assisted board game.
BACKGROUND: Although educators agree that the approach to cancer management must be multidisciplinary, medical students usually observe cancerpatients through the eyes of a single specialist at any given time. METHODS: In order to teach third-year medical students that cancer management is multidisciplinary, we developed the Oncology Game, an interactive, computer-assisted board game built on the principles of self-directed learning and student-student interaction. Eight "patients" with different histologic types of cancer are distributed randomly to 4 students, who play in teams of 2. The object is for the team to obtain the best treatment for its patients by advancing them via a roll of dice through surgical, medical, and radiation oncology clinics in the order most logical for the patient's particular cancer type. To test improvement in cognitive skills as a function of play, 16 students participated in a tournament taking parallel pretest and posttests before and after each round of play. RESULTS: Students demonstrated a statistically significant change in the total number of questions answered correctly each time they played the Oncology Game (F = 4.16, P = 0.018; Pretest Round 1: 8.88 +/- 0.58; Posttest Round 1: 9.63 +/- 0.42; Pretest Round 2: 10.75 +/- 0.62; Posttest Round 2: 11.5 +/- 0.85). Post hoc pairwise comparison revealed a significant improvement in student performance after playing two rounds of the Oncology Game. Based on the postgame survey, students felt they improved their understanding of oncologic principles (4.56 +/- 0.13), knowledge of malignancies (4.50 +/- 0.13), and appreciation for the multidisciplinary nature of cancer management (4.56 +/- 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Improved test scores and postgame survey results demonstrate that third-year medical student students can learn about basic oncology principles and gain an appreciation for oncology as a multidisciplinary field of medicine through an interactive, computer-assisted board game.
Authors: Sabine Fromm-Haidenberger; Gudrun Pohl; Joachim Widder; Gerhard Kren; Florian Fitzal; Rupert Bartsch; Jakob de Vries; Christoph Zielinski; Richard Pötter Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Pushpa Neppala; Michael V Sherer; Grant Larson; Alex K Bryant; Neil Panjwani; James D Murphy; Erin F Gillespie Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-01-12
Authors: Deanna Telner; Maja Bujas-Bobanovic; David Chan; Bob Chester; Bernard Marlow; James Meuser; Arthur Rothman; Bart Harvey Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Carola Lütgendorf-Caucig; Philipp A Kaiser; Alexandra Machacek; Cora Waldstein; Richard Pötter; Henriette Löffler-Stastka Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2017-06-06 Impact factor: 2.463