Question · asked by 1 review
Gamified oral health interventions (mobile apps, serious games, augmented reality, game-based education) vs Conventional or traditional oral health education, or non-gamified interventions (comparator varied; several studies were single-arm/uncontrolled): Plaque index (PI) / oral hygiene
- Population
- Children or adolescents
- Intervention
- Gamified oral health interventions (mobile apps, serious games, augmented reality, game-based education)
- Comparison
- Conventional or traditional oral health education, or non-gamified interventions (comparator varied; several studies were single-arm/uncontrolled)
- Outcome
- Plaque index (PI) / oral hygiene
Gamified interventions appear to improve plaque control and oral hygiene status in children versus conventional methods, but the evidence is narrative and ungraded (individual-study P values only).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Gamified oral health interventions (mobile apps, serious games, augmented reality, game-based education) vs Conventional or traditional oral health education, or non-gamified interventions (comparator varied; several studies were single-arm/uncontrolled) Plaque control / oral hygiene clinical status (plaque index) · Children and adolescents aged <=18 years · Post-intervention (predominantly short-term; long-term follow-up in a minority of studies), School-based settings, specialized dental clinics, and home-based environments Gamified interventions appear to improve plaque control and oral hygiene status in children versus conventional methods, but the evidence is narrative and ungraded (individual-study P values only). The Application of Gamification in Children's Oral Health Management: Systematic Review. (2025) All outcomes | In the gamified mobile health app group, plaque control was superior (P<.05) compared with the conventional method group [Zolfaghari 2021]; a gamified/reminder sticker-book group showed a significant improvement in… | Not reported | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Application of Gamification in Children's Oral Health Management: Systematic Review. 2025 All outcomes | January 1, 2014 to February 9, 2025 | 41 | Low / Critically Low |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.