ArticleJMIR medical education2024
Acceptance of Virtual Reality in Trainees Using a Technology Acceptance Model: Survey Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Using Virtual Reality to Enhance Surgical Skills and Engagement in Orthopedic Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Virtual reality as a viable alternative to cadaveric dissection for temporal bone surgical training: a pilot crossover trial.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 · 2026Article
- National Acceptance and Determinants of Immersive Extended Reality in Health Care in China: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Virtual Reality Simulation in Postgraduate Pediatric Critical Care Training Based on Trainee Perceptions in London: Exploratory Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Development of Virtual Reality Health Literacy: Delphi Expert Consensus Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Virtual reality applications in emergency nursing education: a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Virtual Reality: Applications in Veterinary Science.Veterinary medicine and science · 2026Review
- Non-technical skill performance during remote, international, augmented-reality neonatal resuscitation protocol simulations: a feasibility study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Predicting older adults smart healthcare adoption using an extended TAM.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessing the feasibility of the Virtual Reality Education and Acceptance Protocol among baseball and softball players.PloS one · 2025Article
- Understanding factors influencing the adoption of moxibustion techniques by the population: an extended study based on the UTAUT model.Frontiers in public health · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Virtual reality (VR) technologies have demonstrated therapeutic usefulness across a variety of health care settings. However, graduate medical education (GME) trainee perspectives on VR acceptability and usability are limited. The behavioral intentions of GME trainees with regard to VR as an anxiolytic tool have not been characterized through a theoretical framework of technology adoption. Objective: The primary aim of this study was to apply a hybrid Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and a United Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model to evaluate factors that predict the behavioral intentions of GME trainees to use VR for patient anxiolysis. The secondary aim was to assess the reliability of the TAM-UTAUT. Methods: Participants were surveyed in June 2023. GME trainees participated in a VR experience used to reduce perioperative anxiety. Participants then completed a survey evaluating demographics, perceptions, attitudes, environmental factors, and behavioral intentions that influence the adoption of new technologies. Results: In total, 202 of 1540 GME trainees participated. Only 198 participants were included in the final analysis (12.9% participation rate). Perceptions of usefulness, ease of use, and enjoyment; social influence; and facilitating conditions predicted intention to use VR. Age, past use, price willing to pay, and curiosity were less strong predictors of intention to use. All confirmatory factor analysis models demonstrated a good fit. All domain measurements demonstrated acceptable reliability. Conclusions: This TAM-UTAUT demonstrated validity and reliability for predicting the behavioral intentions of GME trainees to use VR as a therapeutic anxiolytic in clinical practice. Social influence and facilitating conditions are modifiable factors that present opportunities to advance VR adoption, such as fostering exposure to new technologies and offering relevant training and social encouragement. Future investigations should study the model's reliability within specialties in different geographic locations.
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.