Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41586206›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in digital health2025

Artificial intelligence, extended reality, and emerging AI-XR integrations in medical education.

Talia Tene, Diego Fabián Vique López, Marlene Jacqueline García Veloz, Byron Stalin Rojas Oviedo, Richard Tene-Fernandez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Talia TeneDepartment of Chemistry, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, Loja, Ecuador.
Diego Fabián Vique LópezFacultad de Salud Pública, Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo (ESPOCH), Riobamba, Ecuador.
Marlene Jacqueline García VelozFacultad de Ciencias, Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo (ESPOCH), Riobamba, Ecuador.
Byron Stalin Rojas OviedoFacultad de Ciencias, Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo (ESPOCH), Riobamba, Ecuador.
Richard Tene-FernandezHospital Metropolitano de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) and extended reality (XR)-including virtual, augmented, and mixed reality-are increasingly adopted in health-professions education. However, the educational impact of AI, XR, and especially their combined use within integrated AI-XR ecosystems remains incompletely characterized. Objective: To synthesize empirical evidence on educational outcomes and implementation considerations for AI-, XR-, and combined AI-XR-based interventions in medical and health-professions education. Methods: Following PRISMA and PICO guidance, we searched three databases (Scopus, PubMed, IEEE Xplore) and screened records using predefined eligibility criteria targeting empirical evaluations in health-professions education. After deduplication (336 records removed) and two-stage screening, 13 studies published between 2019 and 2024 were included. Data were extracted on learner population, clinical domain, AI/XR modality, comparators, outcomes, and implementation factors, and narratively synthesized due to heterogeneity in designs and measures. Results: The 13 included studies involved undergraduate and postgraduate learners in areas such as procedural training, clinical decision-making, and communication skills. Only a minority explicitly integrated AI with XR within the same intervention; most evaluated AI-based or XR-based approaches in isolation. Across this mixed body of work, studies more often than not reported gains in at least one outcome-knowledge or skills performance, task accuracy, procedural time, or learner engagement-relative to conventional instruction, alongside generally high acceptability. Recurrent constraints included costs, technical reliability, usability, faculty readiness, digital literacy, and data privacy and ethics concerns. Conclusions: Current evidence on AI, XR, and emerging AI-XR integrations suggests promising but preliminary benefits for learning and performance. The small number of fully integrated AI-XR interventions and the methodological limitations of many primary studies substantially limit the certainty and generalizability of these findings. Future research should use more rigorous and standardized designs, explicitly compare AI-only, XR-only, and AI-XR hybrid approaches, and be coupled with faculty development, robust technical support, and alignment with competency-based assessment.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceChatGPTcompetency-based educationdigital literacyhealth educationprompt engineeringsimulation

Identifiers

PMID41586206
PMCPMC12827641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.