ArticleCureus2025
A Comparison Study of Virtual Reality Versus Mannequin-Based Simulations for Educating Trainees in the Pediatric Cardiac Critical Care Unit.
Article in Cureus, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional mannequin-based simulation has been previously demonstrated to be a versatile and effective modality for the education of trainees in the pediatric cardiac intensive care unit (CICU). Unfortunately, creating and maintaining high-fidelity mannequin simulations is resource-intensive. Virtual reality (VR) is an emerging alternative to traditional high-fidelity mannequin simulation for medical education. A previous pilot study by these authors delineated the feasibility of VR in the CICU for the diagnosis and management of patients with hemodynamic compromise. This study sought to compare VR to classic mannequin simulations.
methodsThis prospective, single-center study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of a quaternary pediatric center and conducted from September to December of 2021. Four common CICU patient scenarios were developed for both VR and mannequins, including supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), postoperative hypotension after a Norwood procedure, pulmonary hypertensive crisis, and apnea with bradycardia. The VR logic was created by the authors, and the programming was completed by SimX (Mountain View, California, USA). Pediatric cardiology and advanced cardiac critical care fellows completed the first two simulations using either VR or mannequins and then crossed over to complete the last two simulations on the other modality. Fellows were assessed on their completion of a critical action checklist for each scenario as well as by an eight-question post-simulation knowledge test. The average number of checklist items completed was calculated for both mannequin and VR-based scenarios, stratified by type of simulation and year of fellowship.
resultsA total of 14 fellows completed the study. Overall, the average number of checklist items completed and post-test score increased with each postgraduate year. When comparing the overall number of checklist items completed for all of the simulations between mannequin and VR, there was no significant difference in the means (
conclusionUsing VR, multiple common CICU scenarios were designed to accurately reflect complex physiologic changes in real-time, creating an immersive and highly realistic simulation environment. Trainees performed no differently with VR simulations as compared to high-fidelity mannequin simulations in the pediatric CICU. Further investigation is required to demonstrate how VR compares to traditional simulation modalities for long-term knowledge retention.
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.