ArticlePloS one2025
Virtual reality-based training for radiopharmaceutical administration: development and educational effectiveness.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Development and Educational Evaluation of a Radiation Visualization System in a Virtual Reality Training Module for Radiopharmaceutical Administration: Mixed Methods Study of Students' Learning Experiences.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Educational experiences associated with cold- and hot-run practical training on the handling of unsealed radioactive sources by radiological technologist students.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Process-Related Incidents in Nuclear Medicine: A Four-Year Single-Center Retrospective Analysis to Support the Implementation of a Scenario-Based Radiopharmacy Training.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Japan, task shifting and sharing are promoted to reduce the workload of physicians. Radiological technologists have been assigned new responsibilities, such as securing venous access for radiopharmaceutical administration. This study aimed to develop a prototype Virtual Reality (VR) training system that allows safe and repeatable training for radiological technologists. Additionally, the educational effectiveness of VR training was evaluated, and the concentration levels of the participants were assessed using multiple physiological indicators. Overall, 17 male and 12 female participants (mean age 20.1 ± 0.9 years) were enrolled in this study and classified into two groups-video-based and immersive VR system groups-both of which simulated radiopharmaceutical administration. Concentration and tension levels were evaluated using electroencephalography (EEG) data, salivary amylase levels, and mood assessments. The educational effectiveness was evaluated using a multiple-choice cognitive test. Compared with the resting levels, the alpha/beta ratio of EEG (indicating relaxed concentration) was significantly decreased by 19% in the video-based VR and increased by 40% in the immersive VR groups (both p < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in salivary amylase levels between the two groups. The cognitive test scores, increased by 2.0 and 3.4 points in the video-based VR and immersive VR groups, respectively; a significant difference was observed between both groups (p < 0.05). However, no correlation was found between the EEG ratio and test performance. Thus, immersive VR promotes a more relaxed and concentrated state and was found to have higher educational effectiveness than video-based VR. This suggests that participatory VR training may be more effective than observational VR training. Further research should explore the relationship between educational effectiveness and the evaluation of medical skills.
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.