Review finds promise, but thin evidence, for games in vet education
Bottom line
A new scoping review in Frontiers in Veterinary Science finds that digital game-based learning is still a small but growing part of veterinary education, with just 13 veterinary publications identified compared with 177 in human medical education. The review, by Ingrid Toftaker and colleagues, looked at serious games and gamification across databases including Web of Science, Medline, and Scopus. Across both veterinary and human medical education, games were used most often in clinical sciences, and veterinary studies generally reported that learners responded well, even though evidence on knowledge gains was mixed and study quality was often limited. (frontiersin.org)
Why it matters: For veterinary educators, the review suggests digital games may be a useful adjunct to lectures, labs, and case-based teaching, especially when the goal is engagement, confidence-building, and low-stakes practice. But it also highlights a familiar problem in education research: small numbers, weak controls, inconsistent evaluation, and poor reporting on access and implementation. That means programs interested in gamification may have enough signal to experiment, but not yet enough evidence to assume a game will improve learning on its own. Industry examples already point to practical uses in antimicrobial stewardship, radiographic interpretation, anatomy, and communication training, alongside possible benefits for peer learning and learner well-being. (frontiersin.org)
What to watch: Expect more veterinary schools to test game-based formats, but the next important shift will be better-designed comparative studies that show when these tools improve outcomes, not just whether students enjoy them. (frontiersin.org)
Digital educational games appear to be gaining traction in veterinary education, but the evidence base is still thin. A new scoping review published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science identified 13 veterinary education publications on digital game-based learning, compared with 177 in human medical education, suggesting veterinary training is still early in adopting and evaluating these tools. The review concludes that game-based learning is generally well received and may support learning, particularly in clinical sciences, but says stronger research is needed to define where it works best. (frontiersin.org)
The paper arrives as veterinary education continues to explore technology-enhanced teaching models that can build clinical reasoning, communication, and procedural confidence without adding risk to live-animal teaching. Earlier literature has already described the use of digital games and simulators in veterinary training, and more recent reviews of simulation-based veterinary education have pointed to broader interest in tools that can standardize practice opportunities and expand access to skills training. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
In the new review, Toftaker and colleagues searched Web of Science, Medline, and Scopus using a PRISMA-ScR framework. They found that veterinary and human medical education both tend to use games in clinical sciences, often through simulations and case-based learning. Of the 13 veterinary publications, 10 included evaluations, six assessed learning outcomes, and eight examined affective outcomes such as motivation and confidence. Results on cognitive outcomes were mixed: some studies found improved learning, some found no significant difference, and one reported lower scores for the intervention group on part of an assessment. Only two veterinary studies included control groups that did not use the game, and only one used systematic allocation, which limits confidence in the evidence. The authors also noted that access to games was often poorly documented, making replication harder. (frontiersin.org)
That finding lines up with what has been reported in the broader health professions literature. Prior systematic reviews in medical and health professions education have found that serious gaming and gamification can improve knowledge, skills, and learner satisfaction in some settings, but the overall quality of evidence is often low and studies are highly heterogeneous. More recent medical education reviews continue to describe promise, while also emphasizing that design quality, educational theory, and evaluation methods matter as much as the game format itself. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
On the ground, veterinary educators are already experimenting with these approaches. An AAHA Trends feature from 2025 described faculty using game-based tools to teach challenging topics such as antimicrobial selection, with University of Florida clinical assistant professor Jacob Wolf reporting improved student comfort and accuracy after students used a veterinary card game alongside traditional instruction. The same article quoted educator Jamie Perkins, DVM, who argued that games can create low-stakes spaces for students to identify knowledge gaps, collaborate with peers, and reduce some of the pressure that contributes to early burnout. Separate recent veterinary education studies have also examined game-based approaches for communication skills and digital escape rooms in anatomy teaching. (aaha.org)
Why it matters: For veterinary professionals involved in teaching, curriculum design, or workforce development, this review is less a verdict than a map of where the field stands. It suggests game-based learning may be most useful as a supplement to established teaching, especially in areas where repetition, decision-making, and discussion are valuable. That could make it attractive for Day One competencies, clinical communication, antimicrobial stewardship, and case-based reasoning. At the same time, the review is a reminder that enthusiasm should not outrun evidence. If schools invest in digital games, they’ll need to think beyond engagement metrics and build in stronger outcome measures, comparison groups, usability data, and practical details such as cost, access, and faculty workload. (frontiersin.org)
There’s also a workforce angle. Veterinary education is under pressure to prepare graduates efficiently, support learner well-being, and make training more consistent across settings. Game-based tools may help by offering repeatable, psychologically safer practice environments, but only if they’re aligned with curricular goals rather than added as novelty. That distinction matters for institutions deciding whether to build, buy, or pilot educational games, and for clinicians who teach students in practice settings and want methods that are practical as well as engaging. This is an inference drawn from the review’s findings and the surrounding veterinary education literature. (frontiersin.org)
What to watch: The next phase will likely be more disciplined evaluation, including controlled studies, clearer reporting of implementation, and closer ties between game design and competency-based outcomes. If that happens, the conversation could shift from “Do students like it?” to “Which game formats improve which veterinary skills, for whom, and at what cost?” (frontiersin.org)