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): Oral health knowledge (1-9 scale)
Gamified interventions appear to improve children's oral health knowledge compared with conventional education, but the evidence is narrative and ungraded.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| 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) Oral health knowledge · 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 children's oral health knowledge compared with conventional education, but the evidence is narrative and ungraded. The Application of Gamification in Children's Oral Health Management: Systematic Review. (2025) All outcomes | The effectiveness of digital-based interventions was generally positive, with 38% (9/24) of the experimental studies reporting improvements in oral health knowledge and behaviors; game-based teaching significantly… | 9 studies | 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 |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.