Surgical Education in Medical StudentsNCT05520671
Evaluating TESLA-G, a Gamified, Telegram-delivered, Quizzing Platform for Surgical Education in Medical Students
A study testing Gamified online quizzing platform and Conventional quizzing platform in people with Surgical Education in Medical Students, run by Nanyang Technological University.
Trial summary
Telegram Education for Surgical Learning and Application Gamified (TESLA-G) is an online, gamified quizzing platform for surgical education in medical students.The main objective of this pilot study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of carrying out a full randomised control trial involving TESLA-G. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 100 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Surgical Education in Medical Students
- What is being tested?
- Gamified online quizzing platform and Conventional quizzing platform
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 May 2023to 30 Jun 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 100 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Currently enrolled in a full-time 5-year undergraduate programme in the medical school that leads to the Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS)
- Willing and able to provide consent for participating in the entire duration of the study including all pre- and post-study assessments
Who cannot join
- NIL
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: Evaluating TESLA-G, a Gamified, Telegram-delivered, Quizzing Platform for Surgical Education in Medical Students: a Protocol for a Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial
Telegram Education for Surgical Learning and Application Gamified (TESLA-G) is an online, gamified quizzing platform for surgical education in medical students.The main objective of this pilot study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of carrying out a full randomised control trial involving TESLA-G.
A pilot randomised controlled trial involving 50 undergraduate medical students will be conducted. They will be randomised into an intervention group and an active control group.
Feasibility will be determined by participant enrollment, retention rate, and quiz completion. Acceptability will be measured quantitatively via a post-intervention learner satisfaction survey and qualitatively via semi-structured interviews. Additionally, participants' scores for pre- and post-intervention knowledge tests will be compared.
Read the detailed description
Online multiple-choice question (MCQ) quizzes are a well-established summative assessment tool in medical education. However, they suffer from high drop-out rates, attributed to waning user motivation over time. Various studies have shown that incorporation of gamified elements into learning can promote engagement and motivation.
In this pilot study, we will assess the feasibility and acceptability of a novel gamified quizzing platform, Telegram Education for Surgical Learning and Application Gamified (TESLA-G), to determine the possibility of a future larger-scale randomised controlled trial.
This study entails a randomised controlled trial with two arms, an intervention group (TESLA-G) and an active control group (conventional quizzing platform). 50 first to fifth year medical students from Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University will be randomised into the two arms with a 1:1 allocation ratio, stratified by year of study. Participants will use the assigned quizzing platform to attempt questions on a specific topic (endocrine surgery) over a period of two weeks.
At the end of the study period, several outcomes will be assessed. Feasibility will be determined by participant enrollment, retention rate, and quiz completion. Acceptability will be measured quantitatively via a post-intervention learner satisfaction survey and qualitatively via semi-structured interviews. Additionally, participants' scores for pre- and post-intervention knowledge tests will be compared.
- Conditions
- Surgical Education in Medical Students
- Being tested
- Gamified online quizzing platform, Conventional quizzing platform
- Keywords
- surgical education, medical students, quiz, gamification, randomised controlled trial
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Gamified online quizzing platformOther
TESLA-G is a novel gamified quizzing platform designed based on Bloom's taxonomy of learning domains. Questions will be created in blocks, where each block will test a specific topic within a specialty (endocrine surgery has been selected for this study). Each block has 5 questions, and each question corresponds to each level of Bloom's taxonomy and each level in game.
For this study, we aim to create 56 blocks of 5 questions, totalling 280 questions. All questions will be created by two board-certified general surgeons and one endocrinologist, and validated by the research team.
The aim of the game is for players to get as many points as they can before the timer runs out. Gamification elements include levels, countdown timer, lives, a point multiplier system, leaderboard rankings and a personalised dashboard.
Participants in the intervention group will be provided with a link to access TESLA-G, sent from an automated Telegram bot; this access will be provided for 14 days.
Conventional quizzing platformOther
The conventional quizzing platform will be a modified version of TESLA-G with all gamification elements removed. The same set of questions as the gamified version will be used. Upon entering the quiz, a question stem and five choices will be shown. When an option is selected, the right answer along with its explanation will be indicated. The next question will then be sent, and this process repeats until the participant leaves the platform or has answered every question.
Questions will be queued in blocks, with each block corresponding to a particular topic in endocrine surgery. Unlike the gamified version, questions within each block will be randomised, regardless of their level on the Bloom's taxonomy. Participants will also not be informed of the level of Bloom's taxonomy for individual questions. The access link to the platform will be sent to participants from an automated Telegram bot, and this access will last for 14 days.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| TESLA-G | Experimental | Participants will be randomised into the two arms with a 1:1 allocation ratio stratified by year of study. There will be 25 participants in this arm. Receives: Other: Gamified online quizzing platform |
| Control | Active comparator | Participants will be randomised into the two arms with a 1:1 allocation ratio stratified by year of study. There will be 25 participants in this arm. Receives: Other: Conventional quizzing platform |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Feasibility of intervention
The feasibility of the intervention will be evaluated quantitatively. These are the objectives:
- Enrollment of 50 participants
- Retention of at least 75% of the enrolled participants
- Individual quiz completion rate of 80%
Achieving all of these goals will prove that it is feasible to conduct a full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT), while achieving two out of three goals will indicate that it is probably feasible. Achieving less than two goals will suggest that a full-scale RCT is not feasible with the current procedure.
Measured: 14 days
Acceptability of intervention
Acceptability of the intervention is measured quantitatively via a post-intervention learner satisfaction survey and qualitatively via semi-structured interviews.
Measured: Post-intervention (14 days)
Secondary outcomes (3)
Improvement of surgical knowledge
Scores of pre- and post-intervention quizzes will be compared. The quizzes, which are on endocrine surgery, will be drafted by two board-certified general surgeons and one endocrinologist. All questions will also be validated by the research team. It should be noted however, that the power of study will be inadequate in identifying the comparative effectiveness between the control and intervention groups in terms of improvement of surgical knowledge. Hence the analysis will be primarily conducted to identify any potential adverse effects and increase in the surgical knowledge within each group, and secondarily between groups. This will be done using a confidence interval of 95% using a small effect size of 0.2.
Measured: Pre and post-intervention (14 days)
Participant satisfaction
All participants will also complete a post-intervention learner satisfaction survey, in the form of a Likert scale adapted from the System Usability Survey (SUS) (Brooke et al., 1996) and the Student Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) Questionnaire. The survey will assess if students in the intervention group are more satisfied with their experience than students in the control group.
Measured: Post-intervention (14 days)
Retention of surgical knowledge
After another 14 days, participants will sit for a follow-up knowledge test, which once again consists of 20 MCQs on endocrine surgery conducted over 30 minutes. At this point, participants in both control and intervention groups will no longer be able to access the learning platforms. The difficulty level of the follow-up test will be similar to that of the post-intervention test as described earlier. The difference in test scores (post-intervention and follow-up) will indicate participant retention of surgical knowledge.
Measured: 14 days after intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 Aug 2022
- Study start1 May 2023 (estimated)
- Primary completion30 Jun 2023 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Jun 2023 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (30)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Surgical Education in Medical StudentsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This is an online, pilot randomised controlled trial consisting of two parallel active groups - an intervention group and an active control group. Participants will be randomised into each group with a 1:1 allocation ratio, stratified by year of study.
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Nanyang Technological University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Lorainne Tudor Car, Nanyang Technological University
- Investigators
- Clement, Luck Khng Chia, MBBS, MS, Principal investigator, Department of General Surgery, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, SingaporeLorainne Tudor Car, MBBS, PhD, Principal investigator, Nanyang Technological University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05520671
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SGG20/SN02
- Status last verified
- Apr 2023
- First submitted
- 24 Aug 2022
- Last updated
- 5 Apr 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Douthit NT, Norcini J, Mazuz K, Alkan M, Feuerstein MT, Clarfield AM, Dwolatzky T, Solomonov E, Waksman I, Biswas S. Assessment of Global Health Education: The Role of Multiple-Choice Questions. Front Public Health. 2021 Jul 22;9:640204. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.640204. eCollection 2021.
PubMed 34368038St-Onge C, Young M, Renaud JS, Cummings BA, Drescher O, Varpio L. Sound Practices: An Exploratory Study of Building and Monitoring Multiple-Choice Exams at Canadian Undergraduate Medical Education Programs. Acad Med. 2021 Feb 1;96(2):271-277. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003659.
PubMed 32769474Ryan A, Judd T, Swanson D, Larsen DP, Elliott S, Tzanetos K, Kulasegaram K. Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests. Perspect Med Educ. 2020 Oct;9(5):307-313. doi: 10.1007/s40037-020-00606-z.
PubMed 32789664Yang BW, Razo J, Persky AM. Using Testing as a Learning Tool. Am J Pharm Educ. 2019 Nov;83(9):7324. doi: 10.5688/ajpe7324.
PubMed 31871352Roediger HL, Karpicke JD. Test-enhanced learning: taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychol Sci. 2006 Mar;17(3):249-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x.
PubMed 16507066Larsen DP, Butler AC, Roediger HL 3rd. Test-enhanced learning in medical education. Med Educ. 2008 Oct;42(10):959-66. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03124.x.
PubMed 18823514Jud SM, Cupisti S, Frobenius W, Winkler A, Schultheis F, Antoniadis S, Beckmann MW, Heindl F. Introducing multiple-choice questions to promote learning for medical students: effect on exam performance in obstetrics and gynecology. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020 Dec;302(6):1401-1406. doi: 10.1007/s00404-020-05758-1. Epub 2020 Aug 31.
PubMed 32865608Ayyub A, Mahboob U. Effectiveness of Test-Enhanced Learning (TEL) in lectures for undergraduate medical students. Pak J Med Sci. 2017 Nov-Dec;33(6):1339-1343. doi: 10.12669/pjms.336.13358.
PubMed 29492055Green ML, Moeller JJ, Spak JM. Test-enhanced learning in health professions education: A systematic review: BEME Guide No. 48. Med Teach. 2018 Apr;40(4):337-350. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1430354. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
PubMed 29390949Pei L, Wu H. Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ Online. 2019 Dec;24(1):1666538. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2019.1666538.
PubMed 31526248Vaona A, Banzi R, Kwag KH, Rigon G, Cereda D, Pecoraro V, Tramacere I, Moja L. E-learning for health professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 21;1(1):CD011736. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011736.pub2.
PubMed 29355907Brame CJ, Biel R. Test-enhanced learning: the potential for testing to promote greater learning in undergraduate science courses. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2015 Summer;14(2):14:es4. doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-11-0208.
PubMed 25999314Mitra NK, Barua A. Effect of online formative assessment on summative performance in integrated musculoskeletal system module. BMC Med Educ. 2015 Mar 3;15:29. doi: 10.1186/s12909-015-0318-1.
PubMed 25884641Orr R, Foster S. Increasing student success using online quizzing in introductory (majors) biology. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2013 Fall;12(3):509-14. doi: 10.1187/cbe.12-10-0183.
PubMed 24006398Kibble J. Use of unsupervised online quizzes as formative assessment in a medical physiology course: effects of incentives on student participation and performance. Adv Physiol Educ. 2007 Sep;31(3):253-60. doi: 10.1152/advan.00027.2007.
PubMed 17848591
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Apr 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluating TESLA-G, a Gamified, Telegram-delivered, Quizzing Platform for Surgical Education in Medical Students: a Protocol for a Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05520671
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SGG20/SN02
- Conditions
- Surgical Education in Medical Students
- Keywords
- surgical education, medical students, quiz, gamification, randomised controlled trial
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Nanyang Technological UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 May 2023 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jun 2023 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2023 (estimated)
- First posted
- 30 Aug 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Telegram Education for Surgical Learning and Application Gamified (TESLA-G) is an online, gamified quizzing platform for surgical education in medical students.The main objective of this pilot study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of carrying out a full randomised control trial involving TESLA-G.
A pilot randomised controlled trial involving 50 undergraduate medical students will be conducted. They will be randomised into an intervention group and an active control group.
Feasibility will be determined by participant enrollment, retention rate, and quiz completion. Acceptability will be measured quantitatively via a post-intervention learner satisfaction survey and qualitatively via semi-structured interviews. Additionally, participants' scores for pre- and post-intervention knowledge tests will be compared.
Detailed description
Online multiple-choice question (MCQ) quizzes are a well-established summative assessment tool in medical education. However, they suffer from high drop-out rates, attributed to waning user motivation over time. Various studies have shown that incorporation of gamified elements into learning can promote engagement and motivation.
In this pilot study, we will assess the feasibility and acceptability of a novel gamified quizzing platform, Telegram Education for Surgical Learning and Application Gamified (TESLA-G), to determine the possibility of a future larger-scale randomised controlled trial.
This study entails a randomised controlled trial with two arms, an intervention group (TESLA-G) and an active control group (conventional quizzing platform). 50 first to fifth year medical students from Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University will be randomised into the two arms with a 1:1 allocation ratio, stratified by year of study. Participants will use the assigned quizzing platform to attempt questions on a specific topic (endocrine surgery) over a period of two weeks.
At the end of the study period, several outcomes will be assessed. Feasibility will be determined by participant enrollment, retention rate, and quiz completion. Acceptability will be measured quantitatively via a post-intervention learner satisfaction survey and qualitatively via semi-structured interviews. Additionally, participants' scores for pre- and post-intervention knowledge tests will be compared.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This is an online, pilot randomised controlled trial consisting of two parallel active groups - an intervention group and an active control group. Participants will be randomised into each group with a 1:1 allocation ratio, stratified by year of study.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| TESLA-G | Experimental | Other: Gamified online quizzing platformParticipants will be randomised into the two arms with a 1:1 allocation ratio stratified by year of study. There will be 25 participants in this arm. |
| Control | Active comparator | Other: Conventional quizzing platformParticipants will be randomised into the two arms with a 1:1 allocation ratio stratified by year of study. There will be 25 participants in this arm. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 100 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Currently enrolled in a full-time 5-year undergraduate programme in the medical school that leads to the Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS)
- Willing and able to provide consent for participating in the entire duration of the study including all pre- and post-study assessments
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- NIL
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Gamified online quizzing platformTESLA-G is a novel gamified quizzing platform designed based on Bloom's taxonomy of learning domains. Questions will be created in blocks, where each block will test a specific topic within a specialty (endocrine surgery has been selected for this study). Each block has 5 questions, and each question corresponds to each level of Bloom's taxonomy and each level in game. For this study, we aim to create 56 blocks of 5 questions, totalling 280 questions. All questions will be created by two board-certified general surgeons and one endocrinologist, and validated by the research team. The aim of the game is for players to get as many points as they can before the timer runs out. Gamification elements include levels, countdown timer, lives, a point multiplier system, leaderboard rankings and a personalised dashboard. Participants in the intervention group will be provided with a link to access TESLA-G, sent from an automated Telegram bot; this access will be provided for 14 days. | Other | TESLA-G |
| Conventional quizzing platformThe conventional quizzing platform will be a modified version of TESLA-G with all gamification elements removed. The same set of questions as the gamified version will be used. Upon entering the quiz, a question stem and five choices will be shown. When an option is selected, the right answer along with its explanation will be indicated. The next question will then be sent, and this process repeats until the participant leaves the platform or has answered every question. Questions will be queued in blocks, with each block corresponding to a particular topic in endocrine surgery. Unlike the gamified version, questions within each block will be randomised, regardless of their level on the Bloom's taxonomy. Participants will also not be informed of the level of Bloom's taxonomy for individual questions. The access link to the platform will be sent to participants from an automated Telegram bot, and this access will last for 14 days. | Other | Control |
Primary outcome
Feasibility of intervention
Time frame: 14 days
The feasibility of the intervention will be evaluated quantitatively. These are the objectives: 1. Enrollment of 50 participants 2. Retention of at least 75% of the enrolled participants 3. Individual quiz completion rate of 80% Achieving all of these goals will prove that it is feasible to conduct a full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT), while achieving two out of three goals will indicate that it is probably feasible. Achieving less than two goals will suggest that a full-scale RCT is not feasible with the current procedure.
Acceptability of intervention
Time frame: Post-intervention (14 days)
Acceptability of the intervention is measured quantitatively via a post-intervention learner satisfaction survey and qualitatively via semi-structured interviews.
3 secondary outcomes
Improvement of surgical knowledge
Time frame: Pre and post-intervention (14 days)
Participant satisfaction
Time frame: Post-intervention (14 days)
Retention of surgical knowledge
Time frame: 14 days after intervention
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Apr 2023.
- Background: PubMed 34368038Douthit NT, Norcini J, Mazuz K, Alkan M, Feuerstein MT, Clarfield AM, Dwolatzky T, Solomonov E, Waksman I, Biswas S. Assessment of Global Health Education: The Role of Multiple-Choice Questions. Front Public Health. 2021 Jul 22;9:640204. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.640204. eCollection 2021.
- Background: PubMed 32769474St-Onge C, Young M, Renaud JS, Cummings BA, Drescher O, Varpio L. Sound Practices: An Exploratory Study of Building and Monitoring Multiple-Choice Exams at Canadian Undergraduate Medical Education Programs. Acad Med. 2021 Feb 1;96(2):271-277. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003659.
- Background: PubMed 32789664Ryan A, Judd T, Swanson D, Larsen DP, Elliott S, Tzanetos K, Kulasegaram K. Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests. Perspect Med Educ. 2020 Oct;9(5):307-313. doi: 10.1007/s40037-020-00606-z.
- Background: PubMed 31871352Yang BW, Razo J, Persky AM. Using Testing as a Learning Tool. Am J Pharm Educ. 2019 Nov;83(9):7324. doi: 10.5688/ajpe7324.
- Background: PubMed 16507066Roediger HL, Karpicke JD. Test-enhanced learning: taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychol Sci. 2006 Mar;17(3):249-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x.
- Background: PubMed 18823514Larsen DP, Butler AC, Roediger HL 3rd. Test-enhanced learning in medical education. Med Educ. 2008 Oct;42(10):959-66. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03124.x.
- Background: PubMed 32865608Jud SM, Cupisti S, Frobenius W, Winkler A, Schultheis F, Antoniadis S, Beckmann MW, Heindl F. Introducing multiple-choice questions to promote learning for medical students: effect on exam performance in obstetrics and gynecology. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020 Dec;302(6):1401-1406. doi: 10.1007/s00404-020-05758-1. Epub 2020 Aug 31.
- Background: PubMed 29492055Ayyub A, Mahboob U. Effectiveness of Test-Enhanced Learning (TEL) in lectures for undergraduate medical students. Pak J Med Sci. 2017 Nov-Dec;33(6):1339-1343. doi: 10.12669/pjms.336.13358.
- Background: PubMed 29390949Green ML, Moeller JJ, Spak JM. Test-enhanced learning in health professions education: A systematic review: BEME Guide No. 48. Med Teach. 2018 Apr;40(4):337-350. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1430354. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
- Background: PubMed 31526248Pei L, Wu H. Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ Online. 2019 Dec;24(1):1666538. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2019.1666538.
- Background: PubMed 29355907Vaona A, Banzi R, Kwag KH, Rigon G, Cereda D, Pecoraro V, Tramacere I, Moja L. E-learning for health professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 21;1(1):CD011736. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011736.pub2.
- Background: PubMed 25999314Brame CJ, Biel R. Test-enhanced learning: the potential for testing to promote greater learning in undergraduate science courses. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2015 Summer;14(2):14:es4. doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-11-0208.
- Johnson G. Optional online quizzes: College student use and relationship to achievement. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l'apprentissage et de la technologie 2006;32Link provided by the sponsor.
- Deterding S, Khaled R, Nacke LE. Gamification: Toward a definition. CHI 2011 gamification Published Online First: 2011.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Morillas Barrio C, Munoz-Organero M, Sanchez Soriano J. Can gamification improve the benefits of student response systems in learning? An experimental study. IEEE Trans Emerg Top Comput 2016;4:429-38.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Licorish SA, Owen HE, Daniel B, et al. Students' perception of Kahoot!'s influence on teaching and learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 2018;13:1-23.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Top Apps Worldwide for January 2021 by Downloads. (accessed 23 May 2022)Link provided by the sponsor.
- Most popular messaging apps. Statista. (accessed 23 May 2022).Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Clement, Luck Khng Chia, MBBS, MS principal investigator
Department of General Surgery, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Singapore
Lorainne Tudor Car, MBBS, PhD principal investigator
Nanyang Technological University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Gamified online quizzing platform and Conventional quizzing platform in people with Surgical Education in Medical Students, run by Nanyang Technological University.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Apr 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Clement, Luck Khng Chia, MBBS, MS (+65 6602 2207, Chia.clement.lk@ktph.com.sg), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Feasibility of intervention (time frame: 14 days). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05520671, which also lists 30 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Apr 2023; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 1 Nov 2026.