ArticleBMC medical education2026
Boosting electrocardiography leads location training through virtual reality simulation: effects on skill performance and learner satisfaction.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of electrocardiography lead placement training on the performance and satisfaction of medical students using VR and compare it with training on a real patient and training on a mannequin.
methodsThis was a true experimental study. Ninety undergraduate medical students in the internal medicine rotation course were included in the study. The simulation software for the insertion of electrocardiography lead placement training was designed. The students were then divided into three groups. Practical training for lead placement was conducted via three methods: training on a real patient, a mannequin, and training through VR simulation. The course was evaluated through the DOPS (Direct Observation of Procedural Skills) test and the satisfaction survey form.
resultsThe analysis of the DOPS test scores revealed a significant difference between the VR group and the other two groups (patient: 15.2 (1.89), mannequin: 15.3 (1.71) and VR: 17.5 (1.35)) (P value < 0.001). The results of the survey also indicated that the satisfaction of the students in the VR group was significantly greater than that of the other two groups of patients: (0.24) 1.74, (0.18) 1.76 and (0.18) 2.35 (P value < 0.001).
conclusionConsidering the attractiveness of VR, the use of this software along with other teaching models in anatomy education can increase the motivation and satisfaction of learners.
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.