While games are frequently used in resident education, there is little evidence supporting their efficacy. We investigated whether a spaced-education (SE) game can be both a reliable and valid method of assessing residents' knowledge and an effective means of teaching core content.
The SE game consisted of 100 validated multiple-choice questions and explanations on core urology content. Residents were sent 2 questions each day via email. Adaptive game mechanics re-sent the questions in 2 or 6 weeks if answered incorrectly and correctly, respectively. Questions expired if not answered on time (appointment dynamic). Residents retired questions by answering each correctly twice in a row (progression dynamic). Competition was fostered by posting relative performance among residents. Main outcomes measures were baseline scores (percentage of questions answered correctly on initial presentation) and completion scores (percentage of questions retired).
Nine hundred thirty-one US and Canadian residents enrolled in the 45-week trial. Cronbach alpha reliability for the SE baseline scores was 0.87. Baseline scores (median 62%, interquartile range [IQR] 17%) correlated with scores on the 2008 American Urological Association in-service examination (ISE08), 2009 American Board of Urology qualifying examination (QE09), and ISE09 (r = 0.76, 0.46, and 0.64, respectively; all p