ReviewCureus2026
A Systematic Review Evaluating the Use of Mixed Reality Technologies Within Undergraduate Medical Anatomical Teaching.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Technological advances have shifted undergraduate medical education toward computer-assisted learning (CBL). The recent increase in CBL has most noticeably influenced anatomical curricula. Virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) are emerging computer technologies that modify reality and stimulate senses through contrasting methods. VR submerges individuals within a virtually constructed pseudo-reality using specialist headsets (head-mounted devices). AR merges digitalised images into our natural visual fields, altering reality without a complete digitalised environment. VR and AR can be collectively referred to as mixed reality technologies (MRT). Both technologies are extensions of gaming technologies, which have been increasingly modified to fit into non-gaming applications through a process of 'gamification.' Technological progression and increased commercial accessibility of MRT have furthered the interest in incorporating these technologies within medical education, with an interest in gross anatomical teaching, as visualisation is a compound element of this area of medical science. With technology becoming a great focus within education, there is potential for a paradigm shift, changing how anatomical teaching is delivered. A systematic review was conducted to assess current applications of MRT in undergraduate gross anatomy teaching and whether the use of MRT within gross anatomical teaching influences academic performance. Four databases, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and ERIC, were searched for educational scientific papers. A total of 608 papers were selected to undergo title and abstract screening, out of which seven eligible papers were identified for full analysis and review. The outcome of this review was that VR and AR are as effective as traditional teaching modalities. Three out of the seven studies reported statistically significantly higher academic scores with MRT use, whilst the rest reported no statistically significant difference between the use of MRTs and traditional modalities. There is strong evidence for the use of MRTs as supplementary teaching modalities in undergraduate gross anatomical teaching.
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.