| Literature DB >> 33986043 |
Juan Pimentel1,2,3, Anne Cockcroft4,5, Neil Andersson4,5.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Explore the acceptability and feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess game jams-participatory events to cocreate digital or board games in a time-constrained environment-in cultural safety training of medical students. The pilot tests methods and procedures and explores the validity and reliability of our research instrument.Entities:
Keywords: medical education & training; primary care; social medicine
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33986043 PMCID: PMC8126312 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042892
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants of the study
| Standard lesson (n=33) | Game jam (n=31) | |
| Sex | ||
| Female | 20 (61) | 18 (58) |
| Male | 13 (39) | 13 (42) |
| Place of birth | ||
| Bogotá | 18 (54.6) | 20 (64.5) |
| Colombia, another city | 13 (39.4) | 9 (29) |
| Venezuela | 2 (6) | 2 (6.5) |
| Family in rural settings | ||
| Yes | 12 (36.6) | 15 (48.4) |
| No | 21 (63.4) | 14 (45.2) |
| Do not know | 0 | 2 (6.4) |
| Socioeconomic level | ||
| One (lowest) | 0 | 0 |
| Two | 2 (6) | 0 |
| Three | 4 (12.1) | 5 (16.1) |
| Four | 22 (66.8) | 9 (29) |
| Five | 4 (12.1) | 13 (42) |
| Six (highest) | 1 (3) | 4 (12.9) |
| Family uses traditional medicine | ||
| Yes | 26 (78.8) | 23 (74.2) |
| No | 7 (21.2) | 8 (25.8) |
| Do not know | 0 | 0 |
| Medicinal plants planted at home | ||
| Yes | 9 (27.3) | 13 (42) |
| No | 24 (72.7) | 18 (58) |
| Do not know | 0 | 0 |
| Student self-identifies as minority | ||
| Rural population/peasant | 1 (3) | 3 (9.6) |
| No | 32 (97) | 28 (90.4) |
| Do not know | 0 | 0 |
| Age (years) | ||
| Min | 21 | 21 |
| Max | 30 | 30 |
| Mean (SD) | 22.7±1.6 | 23.3±1.8 |
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the pilot randomised controlled trial.
Figure 2Net probabilistic transitive closure of the CASCADA results chain of medical students’ responses in control and intervention groups in the pilot randomised controlled trial. CASCADA, conscious knowledge, attitudes, positive deviation from negative subjective norms, change intention, sense of agency, discussion and change in practice/action.
Figure 3Differences in cultural safety score between intervention groups by timepoints. The figure compares the scores of cultural safety between the study intervention and control groups. For each timepoint, we show the total score, the score for students with a low score preintervention and the score for students with a high score preintervention. Low preintervention scores are those below the median, and high preintervention scores are those above the median. The horizontal lines in the figure are the median values for the group at that timepoint.
Difference of cultural safety score within intervention groups
| Preintervention | Postintervention 1 | Difference* | 95% CI | n | |
| Total | 23.1 | 26.3 | 64 | ||
| Standard lesson | 23.3 | 25.9 | 33 | ||
| Game jam | 23 | 26.9 | 31 | ||
| Total | 23.1 | 26.7 | 35 | ||
| Standard lesson | 23.9 | 26.8 | 18 | ||
| Game jam | 23 | 26.6 | 17 | ||
| Total | 26.3 | 26.7 | −0.4 | −1.7 to 1 | 35 |
| Standard lesson | 25.7 | 26.8 | −1.1 | −3.1 to 0.9 | 18 |
| Game jam | 26.9 | 26.6 | 0.3 | −1.6 to 2.4 | 17 |
*Significant differences are shown in bold font.
Difference of cultural safety score between intervention groups
| Standard lesson | Game jam | Difference | 95% CI | n | |
| Preintervention | 23.3 | 23 | 0.3 | −1.4 to 2 | 64 |
| Postintervention 1 | 25.9 | 26.9 | -1 | −3.0 to 1 | 64 |
| Postintervention 2 | 26.8 | 26.5 | 0.3 | −2.4 to 3 | 35 |