Nondigital board games are being used to engage players and impact outcomes in health and medicine across diverse populations and contexts. This systematic review and meta-analysis describes and summarizes their impact based on randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials. An electronic search resulted in a review of n = 21 eligible studies. Sample sizes ranged from n = 17 to n = 3110 (n = 6554 total participants). A majority of the board game interventions focused on education to increase health-related knowledge and behaviors (76%, n = 16). Outcomes evaluated included self-efficacy, attitudes/beliefs, biological health indicators, social functioning, anxiety, and executive functioning, in addition to knowledge and behaviors. Using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing bias, most studies (52%, n = 11) had an unclear risk of bias (33% [n = 7] had a high risk and 14% [n = 3] had a low risk). Statistical tests of publication bias were not significant. A randomeffects meta-analysis showed a large average effect of board games on health-related knowledge (d* = 0.82, 95% confidence interval; CI [0.15-1.48]), a small-to-moderate effect on behaviors (d* = 0.33, 95% CI [0.16-0.51]), and a small-to-moderate effect on biological health indicators (d* = 0.37, 95% CI [0.21-0.52]). The findings contribute to the literature on games and gamified approaches in healthcare. Future research efforts should aim for more consistent high scientific standards in their evaluation protocols and reporting methodologies to provide a stronger evidence base.

No abstract

Introduction: Given the impact falls can have on older people and their families, many health and social care services are focused on preventing falls and implementing interventions to reduce future falls. FallCheck is a web app that supports identification of home-hazards and directs users towards self-management strategies to reduce risk of falling. Method: A survey by clinical experts of a beta version of FallCheck was conducted, producing quantitative and qualitative data including issues and attributes identified by respondents. Thirty-six individuals signed up to take part in the study, and 27 respondents took part in the final evaluation survey. Findings: Testing by health and social care professionals found there is scope for using the app as a digital self-assessment tool by people at risk of falls. It has further potential as an effective tool to support environmental/behavioural change to reduce risk of falls. Conclusion: FallCheck was developed from a sound evidence-base to support home-hazard modification as an effective intervention component within a multifactorial intervention to prevent falls. Health and social care professionals found it had good acceptability for use in practice, justifying further testing of the usability and effectiveness of the app in supporting behavioural changes and environmental modifications with people at risk of falling and carers.