VR benefits examination scores for medical students but not significantly for residents¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Subgroup analysis shows significant benefits of VR for medical students (SMD = 0.51, p = 0.04) but no significant influence on residents (SMD = 0.67, p = 0.24). → Zhao Jingjie 2020

Evidence¶

Zhao Jingjie 2020¶

Zhao Jingjie, Xu Xinliang, Jiang Hualin, Ding Yi. (2020). The effectiveness of virtual reality-based technology on anatomy teaching: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-1994-z

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3

Subgroup analysis by learner type across the 15 trials (12 studies of medical students, 3 of residents), reported in Table 2. The review reports the printed SMDs and p values for both subgroups.

"the moderator analysis revealed significant benefits of VR in the subgroup of medical students (SMD = 0.51; 95% CI 0.02–1.01, p = 0.04), whereas VR have no significant influence on residents (SMD = 0.67; 95% CI -0.45–1.01, p = 0.24)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• VR-based anatomy teaching moderately improves learners' examination scores compared with traditional or 2D digital methods — a broader claim this one bears on
• Participant seniority moderates the benefit of HF simulation: residents and third/fourth-year students benefit, first-year students do not — related