“…The publication years of the included studies were from 2016 to 2022. Most of the studies were from the USA (n = 7) [22][23][24]28,29,31,32]. The re- Most of the selected articles are primary studies except for an extensive narrative review.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The re- Most of the selected articles are primary studies except for an extensive narrative review. The selection consisted of three randomized controlled trials [21][22][23]; one randomized experimental study [24]; two qualitative studies [25,26]; three pilot studies [27][28][29]; one evaluation study [30]; one community advisory board study [31]; and one study with a mixed-method approach [32]. The publication years of the included studies were from 2016 to 2022.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The publication years of the included studies were from 2016 to 2022. Most of the studies were from the USA (n = 7) [22][23][24]28,29,31,32]. The remaining studies were conducted in South Korea (n = 2) [21,27], Australia (n = 1) [25], Greece (n = 1) [33], Canada (n = 1) [26], and the UK (n = 1) [30].…”
Background: Education plays a pivotal role in the care of oncological patients, reducing health costs, hospital readmission, and disease relapses. Education can be supportive in achieving multiple outcomes, improving symptom control and quality of life. A new approach is emerging in patient education: gamification. Gamification was defined as the “use of game elements in non-game contexts”, including the application of games in serious contexts. The aim of this review is to explore the use of gamification in the oncology setting. Methods: A systematic scoping review was conducted in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases using the JBI guidelines. Results: The 13 included reports were critically appraised by two reviewers independently. It seems that gamification could be effective both in prevention and cancer treatments. Gamification also seems to improve chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting management, quality of life, and reduced anxiety levels in different cancer groups. Moreover, gamification seems effective in improving self-care in cancer patients, regardless of gender, age, and ethnicity. Conclusions: Gamification improves patient engagement and biopsychosocial outcomes and could represent a valid approach to cancer patient education; however, it is not a substitute for healthcare professionals, who remain the leaders in the education process.
“…The publication years of the included studies were from 2016 to 2022. Most of the studies were from the USA (n = 7) [22][23][24]28,29,31,32]. The re- Most of the selected articles are primary studies except for an extensive narrative review.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The re- Most of the selected articles are primary studies except for an extensive narrative review. The selection consisted of three randomized controlled trials [21][22][23]; one randomized experimental study [24]; two qualitative studies [25,26]; three pilot studies [27][28][29]; one evaluation study [30]; one community advisory board study [31]; and one study with a mixed-method approach [32]. The publication years of the included studies were from 2016 to 2022.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The publication years of the included studies were from 2016 to 2022. Most of the studies were from the USA (n = 7) [22][23][24]28,29,31,32]. The remaining studies were conducted in South Korea (n = 2) [21,27], Australia (n = 1) [25], Greece (n = 1) [33], Canada (n = 1) [26], and the UK (n = 1) [30].…”
Background: Education plays a pivotal role in the care of oncological patients, reducing health costs, hospital readmission, and disease relapses. Education can be supportive in achieving multiple outcomes, improving symptom control and quality of life. A new approach is emerging in patient education: gamification. Gamification was defined as the “use of game elements in non-game contexts”, including the application of games in serious contexts. The aim of this review is to explore the use of gamification in the oncology setting. Methods: A systematic scoping review was conducted in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases using the JBI guidelines. Results: The 13 included reports were critically appraised by two reviewers independently. It seems that gamification could be effective both in prevention and cancer treatments. Gamification also seems to improve chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting management, quality of life, and reduced anxiety levels in different cancer groups. Moreover, gamification seems effective in improving self-care in cancer patients, regardless of gender, age, and ethnicity. Conclusions: Gamification improves patient engagement and biopsychosocial outcomes and could represent a valid approach to cancer patient education; however, it is not a substitute for healthcare professionals, who remain the leaders in the education process.
“…Additionally, it has been shown that educational programs on skin self-examinations in schools may help to establish the use of sunscreen and continued self-examination behaviors which are helpful for early melanoma detection [58]. In a similar vein, game-based training on the ABCD (E excluded for training on static images) or UDS (ugly duckling sign) methods of SSE increased accurate melanoma identification in a study of the general population in the U.S. [59], suggesting that educational efforts based on established SSE aids may improve the detection of suspicious melanocytic lesions.…”
Section: The Ugly Duckling Methodsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…While suspicious lesions can oftentimes be identified without the aid of any tools, one of the most effective ways to visually confirm the suspicious features associated with melanoma is by using a dermatoscope. The dermatoscope, invented in 1989 [59], operates as a specialized magnification device that allows physicians to observe skin areas with high detail, and can now be attached to cameras to take high-resolution photos [61]. The use of this device has shown to be extremely effective in the identification of melanoma amongst both dermatology specialists and general practitioners [62].…”
The past decade has seen numerous advancements in approaches to melanoma detection, each with the common goal to stem the growing incidence of melanoma and its mortality rate. These advancements, while well documented to increase early melanoma detection, have also garnered considerable criticism of their efficacy for improving survival rates. In this review, we discuss the current state of such early detection approaches that do not require direct dermatologist intervention. Our findings suggest that a number of at-home and non-specialist methods exist with high accuracy for detecting melanoma, albeit with a few notable concerns worth further investigation. Additionally, research continues to find new approaches using artificial intelligence which have promise for the future.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.