Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38274907›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

The Present and Future of Virtual Reality in Medical Education: A Narrative Review.

Dipal Mistry, Callaham A Brock, Tom Lindsey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Dipal MistryMedicine, Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine (VCOM) Carolinas, Spartanburg, USA.
Callaham A BrockMedicine, Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine (VCOM) Carolinas, Spartanburg, USA.
Tom LindseySimulation and Technology/Surgery, Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine (VCOM) Carolinas, Spartansburg, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Virtual reality (VR) uses computer-generated and three-dimensional environments to create immersive experiences through the use of interactive devices that simulate virtual environments in many forms, such as 3D, screen-based, or room-based. Users can engage in the environment with objects, characters, and scenes, making individuals assume they are experiencing a real-life scenario. VR has been adopted across medical and nursing fields to supplement clinically relevant and practical teaching. However, the effectiveness of this interactive form of learning has come a long way with improvements in accessibility, cost, and technicalities. The immersive simulated environment that VR has to offer today initially began with screen-based learning and then the 360-video method. These previously sought-out methods were eventually found to disconnect the students from engaging in the learning environment that present-day VR systems are designed to provide. Interactive VR offers a dynamic platform for medical training. These simulations benefit the learner by allowing them to interact within case scenarios and virtual wards, as well as with patients, colleagues, and relatives. To mimic real-life encounters, the student can take a patient's history and physical exam, investigate, diagnose, and provide treatment. The simulated patient can express emotions, concerns, and signs of a poor state of health. All these factors play into a healthcare provider's competency to think critically and clinically in decision-making. This practice is now being used in many surgical programs and medical education curricula. The use of simulation in VR is continuously being proven to decrease injury, increase operation speed, and improve overall outcomes in patient-centered care. VR simulation differs from in-person simulation training in that the VR modality of learning is more accessible and replicable than the latter. By comparing research studies and reviews of medical programs that incorporated VR into their curricula, we were able to assess the state of VR in medical education and where this technology could lead to future implementation in medical programs. Our review aimed to give insight into the existing evidence, the gaps in the use of VR in medical education, and the potential benefits this modality of learning can have going forward in this field of study. Medical students have demonstrated significantly enhanced knowledge gain when using immersive interactive VR over screen-based learning. Given the improvements in students' performance due to these dynamic and collaborative learning experiences, immersive VR training will become a standard in the development of clinical skills and ensure patient safety. Although the emphasis on empathy began later in the journey of gaining VR as a part of medical education, there is a need to gain those skills as early as possible in medical school. Implementing the use of VR as a supplement in medical education allows students to practice simulated patient encounters along with an array of different academic endeavors. By doing so, students will gain competency and confidence as they encounter patients during their clinical rotations and clinical practice.

Indexed as

behavioral empathymedical student simulation trainingmedical student teachingmedical student trainingrealistic simulationsimulation in medical educationvirtual realityvirtual reality simulation

Identifiers

PMID38274907
PMCPMC10810257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.