ArticleCanadian medical education journal2024
Perceptions and reported use of extended reality technology in Royal College-Accredited Canadian Simulation Centres: a national survey of simulation centre directors.
Article in Canadian medical education journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Focus on faculty development.Canadian medical education journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Extended reality technology (XR) in simulation-based medical education is becoming more prevalent. This study examined Canadian simulation centre directors' perceptions toward XR and their self-reported adoption of XR within their centres. Methods: We conducted a national, cross-sectional survey study to examine five kinds of XR: Immersive Virtual Environments, Screen-based Virtual Worlds, Virtual Simulators, Immersive Augmented Reality, and Non-immersive Augmented Reality. An electronic survey with multiple-choice, Likert scales, and open-ended questions were developed to identify the current use, degree of satisfaction, and experienced and foreseen challenges with each XR technology. We used the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys checklist to describe and justify our survey development. All twenty-three Royal College-accredited Canadian simulation centres were invited based on their Royal College membership to complete the survey. Directors and representatives of seventeen (74%) centres participated. Results: Each XR has been used for research or simulation education by about half of the simulation centres, at minimum. The degree of satisfaction among directors with XR ranged from 30% to 45%. Directors frequently cited logistical and fidelity challenges, along with concerns over maintenance. Cost and lack of evidence, and unclear needs were cited as foreseen challenges with the future implementation of XRs. Conclusions: This survey summarizes the status of XR in Canadian simulation centres. The pattern of use, satisfaction levels, and challenges reported by simulation centre directors varied depending on the types of XR.
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.