ArticlePloS one2025
Integrating augmented reality virtual patients into healthcare training: A scoping review of learning design and technical requirements.
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 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.
- Augmented Reality in Implant and Tooth-Supported Prosthodontics Practice and Education: A Scoping Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Augmented reality (AR) enables users to view the real world with enhanced digital information, making it a transformative tool in education. Virtual patients (VPs) technology is also defined as "a specific type of computer-based application that simulates real-world clinical scenario. AR and VPs offer interactive and immersive learning experiences, with AR enhancing the understanding of complex concepts and VPs providing hands-on practice in clinical scenario. This scoping review aims to identify an integrated learning design framework and the technical requirements for augmented reality-based virtual patient Simulation in healthcare professions education. This study employed a scoping review methodology that adhered to the PRISMA-ScR checklist and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines, conducted between September and October 2024. The review covered six reputable databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), Science Direct (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate), Cochrane library, ERIC, Scopus. A comprehensive search yielded 924 potential studies. Articles were selected via a two-stage screening process, involving title/abstract and full-text reviews based on predefined inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through consultation, resulting in 27 studies being included. Eligible studies focused on augmented reality (AR)-based virtual patient (VP) technology in healthcare education, encompassing observational, quasi-experimental, and descriptive designs. Exclusions comprised grey literature, irrelevant studies, non-full-text articles, and non-AR/VP-focused research (e.g., standalone virtual reality). Various design approaches were employed, including situated learning, experiential learning, and the ADDEI model. The technical foundations of these studies were diverse, with Unity, UTTIME and PalpSim being commonly used software platforms. It is recommended that future studies thoroughly investigate each of these design framework and the technical requirements of VPAR, examining them in greater detail from various cultural, economic, social, and emotional perspectives. Tackling these problems will be a crucial stride towards enhancing and optimizing education for healthcare professions education.
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.