Immersive reality training produced higher knowledge and skill scores than conventional training in dental studies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Dental students receiving IR training for pulpotomy achieved higher scores than a control group receiving conventional training. → Ruslin Muhammad 2026 q2 i? In periodontal scaling training, the virtual simulator group scored higher (87.89 ± 6.81) than the quail egg (83.53 ± 8.14) and typodont (85.05 ± 6.81) groups. → Ruslin Muhammad 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Ruslin Muhammad 2026¶

Ruslin Muhammad, Sjamsudin Endang, Hanafiah Olivia Avriyanti, Stevanie Carolina, Kurniawan Sri Hastuti, Anshar Muh, Boffano Paolo, Forouzanfar Tymour, Sukotjo Cortino. (2026). Exploring the impact of immersive reality for enhancing clinical training in dental education: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-09739-x

q2 · i? · review · r2

In the review's knowledge and skill improvement synthesis, the Lu et al. RCT is reported as showing a "higher score achieved by dental students who had IR training for pulpotomy" versus the conventional-training control group. No effect size is printed.

"Lu et al. that discovered higher score achieved by dental students who had IR training for pulpotomy in pediatric dentistry compared with control group who had conventional training [36]."

Ruslin Muhammad 2026 (2)¶

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review reports Fu et al.'s 90-minute dental scaling comparison of virtual simulator (VS), typodont (TT) and quail egg (QE) groups, in which the "VS group scored higher (87.89 ± 6.81)" than both comparison groups. Descriptive means only; no effect size printed.

"VS group scored higher (87.89 ± 6.81) than QE (83.53 ± 8.14) and TT groups (85.05 ± 6.81) [5]."

Discussion¶

IR-based surgical training improved novice surgeons' self-confidence in oral surgery studies — related
Haptic virtual reality simulation reduces procedural time for pulpotomy training compared with conventional simulators — related
Virtual haptic drilling training achieved outcomes similar to conventional practice in less time in restorative dentistry — related
Several included studies found haptic VR training equivalent rather than superior to conventional dental training — reports the opposite
The review synthesizes 13 RCTs and pilot studies (2014-2025), most at low risk of bias, with meta-analysis prevented by heterogeneity — related
Immersive technologies such as virtual reality should reinforce, not substitute, the original educational action — a broader claim this one bears on
Virtual reality was particularly effective for procedural skill development and knowledge retention in paediatric undergraduate training — a broader claim this one bears on
AR/VR training shows equal or superior outcomes versus conventional training in dental and OMFS education — a broader claim this one bears on

Page metadata

Field	Value
`status`	`review`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-10-31`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.