ReviewCureus2025
Virtual Reality-Based Medical Education in Ophthalmology: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of Mixed Reality for Ophthalmic Clinical Skills and Diagnosis: Prospective Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Trial
- Social Media and Telemedicine in Ophthalmology: Misinformation, Patient Perception, and the Evolving Digital Patient.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
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
Virtual reality (VR) is a rapidly growing concept in the field of medical education, offering significant potential for innovation. Assessing how VR is used in ophthalmology to teach medical students, residents, and attendings will help identify areas where VR can be further developed. Moreover, analyzing the strengths and limitations of VR in medical education, surgical training, and patient education within ophthalmology will provide valuable insights into its impact on the field. This scoping review aimed to (1) map the current applications of VR across ophthalmology education, (2) analyze the effectiveness of VR interventions for different learner groups, (3) identify gaps in current VR implementation, and (4) assess the quality of evidence supporting VR use in ophthalmology education. A literature review was performed by scanning databases including PubMed, IEEE Xplore®, and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC). Relevant articles published from 2015 to 2023 were identified through the databases. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were formed for the articles to be further analyzed for eligibility. Articles were further categorized based on their VR application and target learners. Most studies targeted the education of ophthalmology residents, highlighting a gap in VR use among students, other healthcare personnel, and patients. Future research should focus on expanding VR applications to these underrepresented groups. The rapid growth of VR in other areas of medical education suggests similar potential to enhance ophthalmology knowledge and skills across a more comprehensive audience. Research in the application of VR in ophthalmology education should extend beyond surgical training for residents to maximize its potential in improving patient care. For example, studies could explore how VR training improves the ophthalmic diagnostic skills of medical students, evaluate whether VR-based patient education enhances understanding of ophthalmic conditions and leads to improved patient outcomes, and whether VR training for opticians aids in the early detection of specific conditions like diabetic retinopathy. This review is limited by excluding grey literature, which may limit the material analyzed and overlook insights from non-peer-reviewed sources.
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.