ArticleMedical science educator2026
Cognitive Load in Virtual Reality Anatomy Education: Comparing 2D and 3D Learning Experiences.
Article in Medical science educator, 2026. 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.
- Evaluating knowledge acquisition, confidence, and cognitive workload in immersive virtual reality anatomy education: a prospective study of medical students.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With virtual reality (VR) becoming increasingly integrated into educational settings, it remains crucial to understand how different formats of educational content impact cognitive processing. This study examined the impact of 2D versus 3D VR modules on cognitive load and learning outcomes in undergraduate anatomy education. Using real-time biometric measurements collected through VR head-mounted displays, cognitive load was assessed as students observed recorded laryngeal anatomy modules presented by virtual instruction utilizing 2D images or 3D models. Despite no significant impact on learning outcomes, participants in the 2D group consistently demonstrated a higher mean cognitive load (M = 0.58, SD = 0.05) compared to the 3D group (M = 0.49, SD = 0.07), indicating a significant reduction in cognitive effort with 3D visualization. Pre- and post-survey results revealed a mixed landscape in perceptions of VR technology, with some students reporting positive views and comfort, while others expressed significant reservations. Notably, however, no significant difference was found between individually reported attitudes and cognitive load, suggesting that students' cognitive load during the intervention was independent of these variables. Further, prior experience with VR, video game use, and general attitudes toward technology did not significantly influence cognitive load, suggesting that instructional design had a more substantial impact than user familiarity. These findings support the pedagogical value of incorporating 3D VR in anatomy curricula and highlighted the importance of evidence-based design to improve learning outcomes while managing cognitive demand. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-026-02655-1.
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.