Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40033760›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical radiation sciences2025

Comparative Effectiveness of Immersive Virtual Reality and Traditional Didactic Training on Radiation Safety in Medical Professionals: A Crossover Study.

Wanjiku Mwangi, Yuki Tanaka

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

2 authors.

Wanjiku MwangiOsaka University Hospital, Suita, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2169-3849
Yuki TanakaOsaka University Hospital, Suita, Osaka, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRadiation safety is critical in medical settings where ionising radiation is routinely used. Traditional didactic training methods often fail to provide the practical skills needed for effective safety protocol implementation. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR)-based radiation safety training with traditional didactic methods in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. Secondary objectives included assessing participant satisfaction, engagement and confidence in applying radiation safety practices.

methodsA 2-year randomised crossover trial was conducted with 39 medical professionals from cardiac catheterization laboratories and orthopaedic theatres. Group A received VR training in Year 1 and didactic training in Year 2, while Group B received the reverse. Radiation exposure was measured using Landauer Vision dosimeters. Participant feedback on satisfaction, engagement and confidence was collected through surveys. Data were analysed using paired t-tests, generalised estimating equations and non-parametric tests.

resultsVR training significantly reduced radiation exposure compared to didactic training, with larger effect sizes per hour of training. Group A showed significant reductions during Year 1 when they received VR training (Year 2: didactic training), while Group B exhibited similar reductions during Year 2 when they underwent VR training (Year 1: didactic training). Group A, which received VR training in Year 1 followed by didactic training in Year 2, showed significant reductions in radiation exposure during Year 1. Group B, which received didactic training in Year 1 followed by VR training in Year 2, exhibited similar reductions during Year 2. Participant satisfaction and engagement were higher with VR training (p < 0.001), and confidence in applying safety practices increased significantly following VR training (p < 0.001). Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2. Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2.

conclusionThe RadSafe VR Program is more effective than traditional didactic training in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. VR training enhances radiation safety practices, improves participant satisfaction and increases confidence, offering a scalable and cost-effective training solution.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelVirtual RealityAdultCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMaleRadiation Exposure

Identifiers

PMID40033760
PMCPMC12449611

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.