ArticleInsights into imaging2025
Problem-based learning in radiology achieves similar results in classroom and metaverse settings.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Short-term knowledge gains and learner satisfaction after a basic radiology course for family medicine residents in a 3-dimensional virtual environment: a multi-cohort pretest-posttest study in Spain.Journal of educational evaluation for health professions · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe metaverse (MV) is a simulated virtual world enabling simultaneous interaction and communication between students, teachers, and colleagues. This study compared a problem-based learning experience in radiology conducted face-to-face in real life (RL) and within the MV.
methodsDuring a radiology clinical rotation, groups of approximately 25 sixth-year medical students participated over 2 years in real life and 2 years in the MV. Each group was divided into eight teams of 3-4 students, each assigned a radiological clinical case for study, presentation, and debate with classmates. Students evaluated other teams, assessed case difficulty, and completed a perception questionnaire.
resultsA total of 348 students participated in the real-life group and 342 in the MV group, with average teacher evaluation scores of 8.11 ± 1.15 and 7.97 ± 1.54, respectively, showing no significant differences (p = 0.883). No significant differences were found in peer evaluations or case difficulty assessments. Both groups reported positive experiences, with overall satisfaction scores out of 10 points being 7.91 ± 1.32 for RL and 7.54 ± 1.87 for the MV, without significant differences (p = 0.073).
conclusionsProblem-based learning activities in radiology can be effectively conducted in the MV, yielding academic results and experiential perceptions comparable to RL. The MV presents a viable alternative to face-to-face learning when in-person problem-based learning activities are impractical or challenging. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study highlights the potential of the metaverse for effectively conducting radiology problem-based learning activities. It provides evidence for its viability as an alternative educational tool, particularly when face-to-face learning is not feasible. KEY POINTS: Radiology problem-based learning in the metaverse achieved academic results comparable to traditional real-life classroom settings. The metaverse offers unique learning advantages, including remote access, 24/7 availability, and teamwork opportunities. The metaverse provides an excellent problem-based learning alternative when in-person activities are impractical or impossible.
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.