Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35107421›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2022

Virtual Reality in Medical Students' Education: Scoping Review.

Haowen Jiang, Sunitha Vimalesvaran, Jeremy King Wang, Kee Boon Lim, Sreenivasulu Reddy Mogali, Lorainne Tudor Car

Registry-linked trialAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07079059 (Comparative Analysis of Virtual Reality Simulation Training on Clerkship Anesthesia Rotation Experience for Medical Students in a Canadian Setting), which is not on this map. Cited by 85 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07079059 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Comparative Analysis of Virtual Reality Simulation Training on Clerkship Anesthesia Rotation Experience for Medical Students in a Canadian Setting

TypeinterventionalSponsorLondon Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph'sRan2025 to 2027Enrolled180ConditionsAnesthesiaArmsVirtual Reality Training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. When I say … extended reality.Medical education · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Haowen JiangLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4801-7306
Sunitha VimalesvaranLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5289-6537
Jeremy King WangLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7748-7211
Kee Boon LimSchool of Biological Sciences, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3218-5233
Sreenivasulu Reddy MogaliLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0981-5607
Lorainne Tudor CarLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8414-7664

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVirtual reality (VR) produces a virtual manifestation of the real world and has been shown to be useful as a digital education modality. As VR encompasses different modalities, tools, and applications, there is a need to explore how VR has been used in medical education.

objectiveThe objective of this scoping review is to map existing research on the use of VR in undergraduate medical education and to identify areas of future research.

methodsWe performed a search of 4 bibliographic databases in December 2020. Data were extracted using a standardized data extraction form. The study was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and reported in line with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines.

resultsOf the 114 included studies, 69 (60.5%) reported the use of commercially available surgical VR simulators. Other VR modalities included 3D models (15/114, 13.2%) and virtual worlds (20/114, 17.5%), which were mainly used for anatomy education. Most of the VR modalities included were semi-immersive (68/114, 59.6%) and were of high interactivity (79/114, 69.3%). There is limited evidence on the use of more novel VR modalities, such as mobile VR and virtual dissection tables (8/114, 7%), as well as the use of VR for nonsurgical and nonpsychomotor skills training (20/114, 17.5%) or in a group setting (16/114, 14%). Only 2.6% (3/114) of the studies reported the use of conceptual frameworks or theories in the design of VR.

conclusionsDespite the extensive research available on VR in medical education, there continue to be important gaps in the evidence. Future studies should explore the use of VR for the development of nonpsychomotor skills and in areas other than surgery and anatomy. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046986.

Indexed as

digital health educationmedical educationmedical studentsvirtual realityvirtual worlds

Identifiers

PMID35107421
PMCPMC8851326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.