ArticleHuman factors2024
Effects of Augmented Reality-, Virtual Reality-, and Mixed Reality-Based Training on Objective Performance Measures and Subjective Evaluations in Manual Assembly Tasks: A Scoping Review.
Article in Human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the Impact of Augmented Reality Instruction Modes for Manual Wire Harness Assembly Task on Formboards.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- An elephant in the room amplifies discomfort when the virtual reality space matches physical reality.iScience · 2026Article
- A Remote Maintenance Support Method for Complex Equipment Based on Layered-MVC-B/S Integrated AR Framework.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Potential of digital technologies in counteracting long-standing deficits in hemodialysis machine training.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe present scoping review aims to transform the diverse field of research on the effects of mixed reality-based training on performance in manual assembly tasks into comprehensive statements about industrial needs for and effects of mixed reality-based training.
backgroundTechnologies such as augmented and virtual reality, referred to as mixed reality, are seen as promising media for training manual assembly tasks. Nevertheless, current literature shows partly contradictory results, which is due to the diversity of the hardware used, manual assembly tasks as well as methodological approaches to investigate the effects of mixed reality-based training.
methodFollowing the methodological approach of a scoping review, we selected 24 articles according to predefined criteria and analyzed them concerning five key aspects: (1) the needs in the industry for mixed reality-based training, (2) the actual use and classification of mixed reality technologies, (3) defined measures for evaluating the outcomes of mixed reality-based training, (4) findings on objectively measured performance and subjective evaluations, as well as (5) identified research gaps.
resultsRegarding the improvement of performance and effectiveness through mixed reality-based training, promising results were found particularly for augmented reality-based training, while virtual reality-based training is mostly-but not consistently-as good as traditional training. APPLICATION: Mixed reality-based training is still not consistently better, but mostly at least as good as traditional training. However, depending on the use case and technology used, the training outcomes in terms of assembly performance and subjective evaluations show promising results of mixed reality-based training.
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.