Gamification in Oral Pathology EducationNCT07563478
Impact of Gamification as Compared to Conventional Teaching Methods Among Dental Students in Egypt
A study testing Gamification-based Teaching and Traditional Lecture-based Teaching in people with Gamification in Oral Pathology Education, run by Pharos University in Alexandria at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
This study is designed to evaluate the effect of gamification-based teaching strategies on learning outcomes and student engagement in undergraduate oral pathology education. Traditional didactic teaching methods in dental education are often associated with passive learning and variable student engagement. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 22 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Gamification in Oral Pathology Education
- What is being tested?
- Gamification-based Teaching and Traditional Lecture-based Teaching
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 168 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 12 Feb 2026to 16 Apr 2026
- 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 22 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- All third-year students enrolled in the Oral Pathology course during the Spring semester, 2026.
Who cannot join
- Students with previous exposure to the course will be excluded from the study; those who have previously taken the course and failed the exam, or those who are retaking the course to improve their grade.
- Students who haven't completed General Pathology, General Histology or Oral Biology courses will be excluded from the study.
- Students with learning difficulties- as determined by Special Cases Coordinator in the faculty- such as dyslexic or bipolar students will be excluded from the current study.
- Students who were absent during one or more of the intervention sessions.
- Students who did not consent to participate in the study.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Impact of Gamification Compared to Conventional Teaching Among Dental Students in Egypt: A Crossover Controlled Trial
This study is designed to evaluate the effect of gamification-based teaching strategies on learning outcomes and student engagement in undergraduate oral pathology education. Traditional didactic teaching methods in dental education are often associated with passive learning and variable student engagement. In response, educational gamification has emerged as an innovative pedagogical approach that integrates game elements into learning activities to enhance motivation, participation, and knowledge retention.
This study employs a crossover interventional design involving undergraduate dental students enrolled in an Oral Pathology course. Participants will be exposed to both traditional teaching methods and gamified learning interventions in a structured sequence, allowing each participant to serve as their own control. The gamified intervention includes the use of an online game designed on Genially to reinforce key concepts in Oral Pathology. The traditional control arm consists of standard lecture-based instruction without gamification elements.
Read more
The primary objective of this study is to compare knowledge acquisition between gamified and traditional teaching approaches, measured through standardized assessments administered after each intervention phase. Secondary objectives include evaluating student engagement, satisfaction, and perception of learning effectiveness using validated structured questionnaires.
The study aims to determine whether gamification enhances academic performance and improves student engagement compared to conventional teaching methods. It also seeks to explore student perceptions of innovative teaching strategies and their potential integration into the dental curriculum.
Data will be collected at multiple time points corresponding to each phase of the crossover design. Statistical analysis will compare outcomes between intervention periods, accounting for within-subject variability. The findings are expected to provide evidence-based insights into the effectiveness of gamification in dental education and support curriculum development strategies aimed at improving active learning and student-centered teaching approaches.
This study addresses an important gap in dental education research by systematically evaluating gamification using a controlled crossover design, providing robust comparative data between traditional and innovative teaching methods in oral pathology education.
Read the detailed description
This study evaluates the effect of gamification-based teaching strategies on learning outcomes and student engagement in undergraduate Oral Pathology education. Traditional lecture-based teaching in dental curricula is widely used; however, it is often associated with passive learning, limited interaction, and variable student engagement. In contrast, gamification integrates game design elements into educational activities to enhance motivation, participation, and active learning.
Study Design Randomized controlled crossover experimental design to compare a gamified learning intervention with a traditional revision approach. This design allows each participant to act as their own control, thereby minimizing inter-individual variability and strengthening internal validity.
Study Setting and Participants The study is conducted among third-year dental students enrolled in the Oral Pathology course, Faculty of Dentistry, Pharos University in Alexandria during spring semester of the academic year 2026. Participants are informed about the study objectives, and a written informed consent is obtained prior to their inclusion.
Data Collection Data collection was carried out during the period from February to April 2026. The data is collected via Google Forms, through face-to-face sessions, or during scheduled tutorials under standardized conditions to ensure consistency and reliability of responses.
Data Collection Tools
- Demographic Questionnaire: The demographic questionnaire is developed to collect age, gender, cumulative GPA, secondary school education and parental educational level.
- Learning Style Inventory: The validated VARK questionnaire (Version 9.0) is used to categorize students' learning preferences
- Gamified Learning Tool: Two custom-designed digital games are designed on Genially(reference). To reduce content related confounding and to enhance the reliability of comparisons across the two intervention phases, a single Oral Pathology topic "White Lesions of the Oral Cavity" is selected for the study. The topic is deliberately divided into two equivalent parts: White Lesions-Part I (WL1) and White Lesions- Part II (WL2), each covering distinct but comparable subtopics with similar learning objectives and cognitive demands.
- Traditional Revision Session: Standardized PowerPoint slides and instructor-led case discussions covering the same content and learning objectives as the interventional session.
- Knowledge Assessment Tests: Four parallel, pre-validated versions of a test consisting of 10 Multiple-Choice Questions; including 2 pre-tests (WL1 and WL2) and 2 post-tests (WL1 and WL2).
- Satisfaction and Engagement Survey: A mixed-methods survey incorporating a 5-point Likert scale to quantify enjoyment, perceived learning, and engagement, adapted from the DREEM framework is used.
- Focus Groups: Focus groups with a selected number of students (e.g. 20 students) to collect detailed qualitative feedback and further ideas for improvement.
Data Collection Procedures Week 0 (Baseline): Informed consent, demographic questionnaire, and VARK inventory. Cluster Randomization: Participants are randomly assigned to Group A or Group B.
- Week 1 (Phase I) Group A (Intervention): Pre-test → Game → Immediate Post-test on WL1. Group B (Control): Pre-test → Traditional Revision → Immediate Post-test on topic WL1.
- Week 3 (Phase II) - Groups cross over and repeat the process with WL2. Group B (Intervention): Pre-test → Game → Immediate Post-test on WL2.
Group A (Control): Pre-test → Traditional Revision → Immediate Post-test on topic WL2.
- Week 5 All participants complete a comprehensive delayed post-test on WL1 to assess long-term retention.
- Week 7 All participants complete a comprehensive delayed post-test on WL2 to assess long-term retention.
All participants complete the Satisfaction and Engagement Survey. A selected number of students are included in focus groups to collect qualitative feedback.
Data Analysis Data is analyzed using SPSS (Version 28). A p-value < 0.05 is considered significant.
- Descriptive statistics for demographics.
- A mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA will be used to analyze knowledge scores, accounting for the crossover design(21).
- Satisfaction/Engagement: Mann-Whitney U tests will compare satisfaction scores. Qualitative feedback will be analyzed using thematic analysis.
- Moderating Role of Learning Styles: An interaction term (Learning Style * Intervention Type) will be added to the ANOVA model to test for moderation.
- Gender, cumulative GPA, socio-cultural status, parental educational level, and school education will be included as covariates in the primary analysis (ANCOVA).
- Conditions
- Gamification in Oral Pathology Education
- Being tested
- Gamification-based Teaching, Traditional Lecture-based Teaching
- Keywords
- Oral Pathology, Dental Education, Gamification, Undergraduate Dental Students, Cross-over, Educational Intervention
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Gamification-based TeachingBehavioural
Two custom-designed digital games will be designed on Genially(reference). To reduce content-related confounding and to enhance the reliability of comparisons across the two intervention phases, a single Oral Pathology topic was selected for the study. The topic was deliberately divided into two equivalent parts, each covering distinct but comparable subtopics with similar learning objectives and cognitive demands.
Educational Principles Incorporated
- Retrieval Practice: The game emphasizes active retrieval of information through repeated questioning and case-based challenges.
- Spaced Repetition: Core Oral Pathology concepts are revisited across multiple stages of gameplay.
- Scaffolding (Progressive Difficulty): Game levels are structured to progress from simple to complex cognitive demands. This progressive structure aimed to support cognitive load management and facilitate deeper learning.
- Feedback: Immediate feedback is provided after each response.
Traditional Lecture-based TeachingBehavioural
Conventional teaching method used in Oral Pathology education, consisting of structured instructor-led lectures and standard PowerPoint presentations without gamification elements. The teaching is delivered in a passive learning format focusing on theoretical explanation of Oral Pathology concepts.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Gamification Sequence | Experimental | Participants in this arm receive gamification-based teaching in the first phase of the study, followed by traditional lecture-based instruction in the second phase after cross-over. The gamified intervention included a digital game, created on Genially to enhance knowledge acquisition, retention and student engagement. Receives: Behavioral: Gamification-based Teaching; Behavioral: Traditional Lecture-based Teaching |
| Traditional Sequence | Active comparator | Participants in this arm receive traditional lecture-based teaching in the first phase of the study, followed by gamification-based teaching in the second phase after the cross-over. The traditional teaching method consists of standard PowerPoint lectures, without game-based elements. Receives: Behavioral: Gamification-based Teaching; Behavioral: Traditional Lecture-based Teaching |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Knowledge Acquisition
Assessment of student knowledge acquisition following each teaching phase (gamification-based and traditional lecture-based instruction). Knowledge is measured using a standardized assessment, consisting of 10 multiple-choice questions (1 point each). On a scale of 0-10, students were given scores, with 10 representing the best scores. Scores are compared before (pre-test) and immediately after (immediate post-test) the intervention. Scores are also compared between intervention phases in a cross-over design, where each participant serves as their own control.
Measured: Week (1) and Week (3): Immediately after the completion of each teaching phase (gamification phase and traditional teaching phase).
Long-term retention
Assessment of student knowledge retention, four weeks after the teaching phase (Gamification-based and Traditional lecture-based instruction). Knowledge is measured using a standardized assessment consisting of 10 multiple-choice questions (1 point each). On a scale of 0-10, students were given scores, with 10 representing the best scores. Scores are compared before the intervention (pre-test) and 4-weeks after the intervention (delayed post-test). Scores are also compared between intervention phases in a cross-over design, where each participant serves as their own control.
Measured: Week (5) and week (7): 4 weeks after the teaching phase
Secondary outcomes (1)
Student Satisfaction and Engagement
Evaluation of student satisfaction and level of engagement during each teaching method, using a validated Likert-scale questionnaire, on a scale of 0-4 (with 0 representing least satisfied and 4 representing most satisfied). The structured questionnaire is adapted from the DREEM questionnaire and assesses engagement, enjoyment and perceived learning during the gamification phase.
Measured: Week (7): After completion of all phases of the intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 May 2026
- Study start12 Feb 2026
- Primary completion9 Apr 2026
- Study completion16 Apr 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Gamification in Oral Pathology EducationStudies 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
- Crossover
- Model description
- Randomized Cross Over Clinical Trial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 168 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Pharos University in Alexandria
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Wedad M. Nawar, Pharos University in Alexandria
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07563478
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PUA-0220260163462
- Status last verified
- May 2026
- First submitted
- 19 Apr 2026
- Last updated
- 19 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Impact of Gamification Compared to Conventional Teaching Among Dental Students in Egypt: A Crossover Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07563478
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PUA-0220260163462
- Conditions
- Gamification in Oral Pathology Education
- Keywords
- Oral Pathology, Dental Education, Gamification, Undergraduate Dental Students, Cross-over, Educational Intervention
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 168 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Pharos University in AlexandriaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 12 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 9 Apr 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 16 Apr 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 May 2026 (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.
This study is designed to evaluate the effect of gamification-based teaching strategies on learning outcomes and student engagement in undergraduate oral pathology education. Traditional didactic teaching methods in dental education are often associated with passive learning and variable student engagement. In response, educational gamification has emerged as an innovative pedagogical approach that integrates game elements into learning activities to enhance motivation, participation, and knowledge retention.
This study employs a crossover interventional design involving undergraduate dental students enrolled in an Oral Pathology course. Participants will be exposed to both traditional teaching methods and gamified learning interventions in a structured sequence, allowing each participant to serve as their own control. The gamified intervention includes the use of an online game designed on Genially to reinforce key concepts in Oral Pathology. The traditional control arm consists of standard lecture-based instruction without gamification elements.
The primary objective of this study is to compare knowledge acquisition between gamified and traditional teaching approaches, measured through standardized assessments administered after each intervention phase. Secondary objectives include evaluating student engagement, satisfaction, and perception of learning effectiveness using validated structured questionnaires.
The study aims to determine whether gamification enhances academic performance and improves student engagement compared to conventional teaching methods. It also seeks to explore student perceptions of innovative teaching strategies and their potential integration into the dental curriculum.
Data will be collected at multiple time points corresponding to each phase of the crossover design. Statistical analysis will compare outcomes between intervention periods, accounting for within-subject variability. The findings are expected to provide evidence-based insights into the effectiveness of gamification in dental education and support curriculum development strategies aimed at improving active learning and student-centered teaching approaches.
This study addresses an important gap in dental education research by systematically evaluating gamification using a controlled crossover design, providing robust comparative data between traditional and innovative teaching methods in oral pathology education.
Detailed description
This study evaluates the effect of gamification-based teaching strategies on learning outcomes and student engagement in undergraduate Oral Pathology education. Traditional lecture-based teaching in dental curricula is widely used; however, it is often associated with passive learning, limited interaction, and variable student engagement. In contrast, gamification integrates game design elements into educational activities to enhance motivation, participation, and active learning.
Study Design Randomized controlled crossover experimental design to compare a gamified learning intervention with a traditional revision approach. This design allows each participant to act as their own control, thereby minimizing inter-individual variability and strengthening internal validity.
Study Setting and Participants The study is conducted among third-year dental students enrolled in the Oral Pathology course, Faculty of Dentistry, Pharos University in Alexandria during spring semester of the academic year 2026. Participants are informed about the study objectives, and a written informed consent is obtained prior to their inclusion.
Data Collection Data collection was carried out during the period from February to April 2026. The data is collected via Google Forms, through face-to-face sessions, or during scheduled tutorials under standardized conditions to ensure consistency and reliability of responses.
Data Collection Tools
- Demographic Questionnaire: The demographic questionnaire is developed to collect age, gender, cumulative GPA, secondary school education and parental educational level.
- Learning Style Inventory: The validated VARK questionnaire (Version 9.0) is used to categorize students' learning preferences
- Gamified Learning Tool: Two custom-designed digital games are designed on Genially(reference). To reduce content related confounding and to enhance the reliability of comparisons across the two intervention phases, a single Oral Pathology topic "White Lesions of the Oral Cavity" is selected for the study. The topic is deliberately divided into two equivalent parts: White Lesions-Part I (WL1) and White Lesions- Part II (WL2), each covering distinct but comparable subtopics with similar learning objectives and cognitive demands.
- Traditional Revision Session: Standardized PowerPoint slides and instructor-led case discussions covering the same content and learning objectives as the interventional session.
- Knowledge Assessment Tests: Four parallel, pre-validated versions of a test consisting of 10 Multiple-Choice Questions; including 2 pre-tests (WL1 and WL2) and 2 post-tests (WL1 and WL2).
- Satisfaction and Engagement Survey: A mixed-methods survey incorporating a 5-point Likert scale to quantify enjoyment, perceived learning, and engagement, adapted from the DREEM framework is used.
- Focus Groups: Focus groups with a selected number of students (e.g. 20 students) to collect detailed qualitative feedback and further ideas for improvement.
Data Collection Procedures Week 0 (Baseline): Informed consent, demographic questionnaire, and VARK inventory. Cluster Randomization: Participants are randomly assigned to Group A or Group B.
- Week 1 (Phase I) Group A (Intervention): Pre-test → Game → Immediate Post-test on WL1. Group B (Control): Pre-test → Traditional Revision → Immediate Post-test on topic WL1.
- Week 3 (Phase II) - Groups cross over and repeat the process with WL2. Group B (Intervention): Pre-test → Game → Immediate Post-test on WL2.
Group A (Control): Pre-test → Traditional Revision → Immediate Post-test on topic WL2.
- Week 5 All participants complete a comprehensive delayed post-test on WL1 to assess long-term retention.
- Week 7 All participants complete a comprehensive delayed post-test on WL2 to assess long-term retention.
All participants complete the Satisfaction and Engagement Survey. A selected number of students are included in focus groups to collect qualitative feedback.
Data Analysis Data is analyzed using SPSS (Version 28). A p-value < 0.05 is considered significant.
- Descriptive statistics for demographics.
- A mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA will be used to analyze knowledge scores, accounting for the crossover design(21).
- Satisfaction/Engagement: Mann-Whitney U tests will compare satisfaction scores. Qualitative feedback will be analyzed using thematic analysis.
- Moderating Role of Learning Styles: An interaction term (Learning Style * Intervention Type) will be added to the ANOVA model to test for moderation.
- Gender, cumulative GPA, socio-cultural status, parental educational level, and school education will be included as covariates in the primary analysis (ANCOVA).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomized Cross Over Clinical Trial
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Gamification Sequence | Experimental | Behavioral: Gamification-based Teaching, Behavioral: Traditional Lecture-based TeachingParticipants in this arm receive gamification-based teaching in the first phase of the study, followed by traditional lecture-based instruction in the second phase after cross-over. The gamified intervention included a digital game, created on Genially to enhance knowledge acquisition, retention and student engagement. |
| Traditional Sequence | Active comparator | Behavioral: Gamification-based Teaching, Behavioral: Traditional Lecture-based TeachingParticipants in this arm receive traditional lecture-based teaching in the first phase of the study, followed by gamification-based teaching in the second phase after the cross-over. The traditional teaching method consists of standard PowerPoint lectures, without game-based elements. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 22 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- All third-year students enrolled in the Oral Pathology course during the Spring semester, 2026.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Students with previous exposure to the course will be excluded from the study; those who have previously taken the course and failed the exam, or those who are retaking the course to improve their grade.
- Students who haven't completed General Pathology, General Histology or Oral Biology courses will be excluded from the study.
- Students with learning difficulties- as determined by Special Cases Coordinator in the faculty- such as dyslexic or bipolar students will be excluded from the current study.
- Students who were absent during one or more of the intervention sessions.
- Students who did not consent to participate in the study.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Gamification-based TeachingTwo custom-designed digital games will be designed on Genially(reference). To reduce content-related confounding and to enhance the reliability of comparisons across the two intervention phases, a single Oral Pathology topic was selected for the study. The topic was deliberately divided into two equivalent parts, each covering distinct but comparable subtopics with similar learning objectives and cognitive demands. Educational Principles Incorporated 1. Retrieval Practice: The game emphasizes active retrieval of information through repeated questioning and case-based challenges. 2. Spaced Repetition: Core Oral Pathology concepts are revisited across multiple stages of gameplay. 3. Scaffolding (Progressive Difficulty): Game levels are structured to progress from simple to complex cognitive demands. This progressive structure aimed to support cognitive load management and facilitate deeper learning. 4. Feedback: Immediate feedback is provided after each response. | Behavioural | Gamification Sequence, Traditional Sequence |
| Traditional Lecture-based TeachingConventional teaching method used in Oral Pathology education, consisting of structured instructor-led lectures and standard PowerPoint presentations without gamification elements. The teaching is delivered in a passive learning format focusing on theoretical explanation of Oral Pathology concepts. | Behavioural | Gamification Sequence, Traditional Sequence |
Primary outcome
Knowledge Acquisition
Time frame: Week (1) and Week (3): Immediately after the completion of each teaching phase (gamification phase and traditional teaching phase).
Assessment of student knowledge acquisition following each teaching phase (gamification-based and traditional lecture-based instruction). Knowledge is measured using a standardized assessment, consisting of 10 multiple-choice questions (1 point each). On a scale of 0-10, students were given scores, with 10 representing the best scores. Scores are compared before (pre-test) and immediately after (immediate post-test) the intervention. Scores are also compared between intervention phases in a cross-over design, where each participant serves as their own control.
Long-term retention
Time frame: Week (5) and week (7): 4 weeks after the teaching phase
Assessment of student knowledge retention, four weeks after the teaching phase (Gamification-based and Traditional lecture-based instruction). Knowledge is measured using a standardized assessment consisting of 10 multiple-choice questions (1 point each). On a scale of 0-10, students were given scores, with 10 representing the best scores. Scores are compared before the intervention (pre-test) and 4-weeks after the intervention (delayed post-test). Scores are also compared between intervention phases in a cross-over design, where each participant serves as their own control.
1 secondary outcome
Student Satisfaction and Engagement
Time frame: Week (7): After completion of all phases of the intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 May 2026.
- 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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Gamification-based Teaching and Traditional Lecture-based Teaching in people with Gamification in Oral Pathology Education, run by Pharos University in Alexandria at 1 site in Egypt.
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 1 inclusion and 5 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 19 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Knowledge Acquisition (time frame: Week (1) and Week (3): Immediately after the completion of each teaching phase (gamification phase and traditional teaching phase).). 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?
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 19 May 2026.