ArticleBMC medical education2020
Can virtual reality improve traditional anatomy education programmes? A mixed-methods study on the use of a 3D skull model.
Article in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How virtual reality is being adopted in anatomy education in health sciences and allied health: A systematic review.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of virtual reality on medical students' academic achievement in anatomy: systematic review.BMC medical education · 2024Pooled it
- Is virtual reality enhancing dental anatomy education? A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2024Pooled it
- 3D visualization technology for Learning human anatomy among medical students and residents: a meta- and regression analysis.BMC medical education · 2024Pooled it
- Cooperative learning in anatomy: Comparing virtual avatars and human specimens.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Trial
- Evaluation of glasses-free 3D anatomy learning materials through a randomized control study with a puzzle-like method.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Trial
- Impact of virtual reality training on mastoidectomy performance: a prospective randomised study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024Trial
- Utility of 3D printed models as adjunct in acetabular fracture teaching for Orthopaedic trainees.BMC medical education · 2022Trial
- Learning facial muscle anatomy using virtual reality simulation: a randomized controlled study among medical students in Iraq.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
- Optimizing Skull Base Anatomy Education: Qualitative Insights From Learner Interaction With 2D, Monoscopic 3D, and Virtual Reality Models.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- A review of head-mounted devices for surgical education, preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Cognitive Load in Virtual Reality Anatomy Education: Comparing 2D and 3D Learning Experiences.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- A global overview of anatomical science education and its present and future role in biomedical curricula.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Review
- The impact of an immersive virtual reality anatomy lab for informal science education.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Engagement and cognitive load of upper-year medical trainees during mixed reality-enhanced dissection.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
- Cognitive Load Measurement of Using Virtual Reality Headset (Oculus Rift CV1) to Enrich the Anatomy Course and Increase Motivation Among Medical Students.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- From Cadavers to Codes: The Evolution of Anatomy Education Through Digital Technologies.Medical science educator · 2025Review
- Effect of Virtual Reality Simulation on Anatomy Learning Outcomes: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- [Experiences of nursing students with virtual reality-based anatomy education in Korea: a qualitative content analysis].Journal of Korean biological nursing science · 2025Article
- Enhancing Neuroanatomy Teaching with DSI Studio's Fiber Reconstruction Technology.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRealistic, portable, and scalable lectures, cadaveric models, 2D atlases and computer simulations are being combined more frequently for teaching anatomy, which result in major increases in user satisfaction. However, although digital simulations may be more portable, interesting, or motivating than traditional teaching tools, whether they are superior in terms of student learning remain unclear. This paper presents a study in which the educational effectiveness of a virtual reality (VR) skull model is compared with that of cadaveric skulls and atlases. The aim of this study was to compare the results of teaching with VR to results of teaching with traditional teaching methods by administering objective questionnaires and perception surveys.
methodsA mixed-methods study with 73 medical students was conducted with three different groups, namely, the VR group (N = 25), cadaver group (N = 25) and atlas group (N = 23). Anatomical structures were taught through an introductory lecture and model-based learning. All students completed the pre- and post-intervention tests, which comprised a theory test and an identification test. The theory test consisted of 18 multiple-choice questions, and the identification test consisted of 25 fill-in-the-blank questions.
resultsThe participants in all three groups had significantly higher total scores on the post-intervention test than on the pre-intervention test; the post-intervention test score in the VR group was not statistically significantly higher than the post-intervention test score of the other groups (VR: 30 [IQR: 22-33.5], cadaver: 26 [IQR: 20-31.5], atlas: 28[IQR: 20-33]; p > 0.05). The participants in the VR and cadaver groups provided more positive feedback on their learning models than the atlas group (VR: 26 [IQR: 19-30], cadaver: 25 [IQR: 19.5-29.5], atlas: 12 [IQR: 9-20]; p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe skull virtual learning resource (VLR) was equally efficient as the cadaver skull and atlas in teaching anatomy structures. Such a model can aid individuals in understanding complex anatomical structures with a higher level of motivation and tolerable adverse effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.