ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2026
Learning facial muscle anatomy using virtual reality simulation: a randomized controlled study among medical students in Iraq.
Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVirtual reality (VR) is increasingly used in medical education, particularly for teaching anatomically complex content. However, evidence comparing learning outcomes with conventional screen-based instruction remains limited. This study examined differences in learning outcomes between an immersive, interactive VR-based learning experience and a smart-screen lesson in facial muscle anatomy.
methodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted with 48 second-year medical students at the University of Sumer, Iraq. Participants completed a 15-item multiple-choice test and were randomly assigned to a VR or smart-screen group. Both groups studied identical content during a 15-minute session. Knowledge was assessed before, immediately after, and two weeks later. Presence and enjoyment were also measured. Data were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA, with additional analyses of learning gain and retention.
resultsBoth groups improved after the session. However, the VR condition resulted in significantly higher post-test and follow-up scores. A significant time-by-group interaction indicated different learning trajectories. Additional analyses showed greater learning gains in the VR group, while no significant difference was found in retention. Students in the VR group also reported higher presence and enjoyment.
conclusionImmersive and interactive environments may improve short-term learning of complex anatomy. However, retention patterns were similar across conditions, suggesting that differences are mainly due to initial learning rather than sustained retention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42920196What 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.