ArticleCureus2025
Feasibility and Safety of Virtual Reality-Based Online Group Discussions Among Nursing Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Authors' Reply: Enhancing Team-Based Learning in Virtual Environments: The Role of Avatar Agency and Immersive Social Presence.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Enhancing Team-Based Learning in Virtual Environments: The Role of Avatar Agency and Immersive Social Presence.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a potential tool for enhancing learning experiences in various fields, including nursing education. However, its feasibility, safety, and impact on online group discussions remain underexplored. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of VR conferencing in basic education courses for nursing students. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted with third-year nursing students at Mie University, Tsu, Japan. Participants were assigned non-randomly to either a VR discussion group using MetaQuest 3 and Horizon Workrooms or a video discussion group using Zoom meetings. The groups discussed challenges in the daily lives of patients with chronic shoulder pain and completed tasks, such as listing and ranking challenges. After the discussions, data on discussion drop rates, levels of understanding, teamwork, psychological safety, cybersickness, cognitive load, and impressions of VR and avatar usage were collected. All variables are summarized by the group as means and standard deviations, medians and interquartile ranges, or frequencies and percentages, as appropriate. Results A total of 36 nursing students participated in this study (VR group: n=17; video group: n=19). All participants completed the discussions without dropping out or experiencing cybersickness. The average discussion time was comparable between the groups (approximately 10 minutes). Both groups demonstrated an equivalent understanding of the topic. Both discussion methods had positive effects on teamwork and psychological safety. Cognitive load differences were mixed, with VR reducing some elements of task-related stress (e.g., understanding the overall discussion) but showing higher demands in others (e.g., the design for learning tasks). Participants in the VR group reported a high intention to continue using VR and noted that avatar customization (e.g., clothing and hairstyles) influenced the discussions. Conclusions Both VR and video groups engaged in discussions of similar quality and completed the discussion. As none of the participants had cybersickness or dropped out of the discussions, it was thought that the VR discussions were feasible. Carefully selecting discussion themes, evaluation items, and avatar conditions, as well as verifying the effectiveness of online discussion methods, are necessary.
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.