VR-based anatomy teaching moderately improves learners' examination scores compared with traditional or 2D digital methods¶

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 Across 15 randomized controlled trials, pooled analysis shows VR improves anatomy test scores moderately versus other teaching methods (SMD = 0.53). → 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

Meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials with 816 learners (745 medical students, 71 residents), pooling examination scores with random-effects models. The review reports "SMD = 0.53; 95% CI 0.09–0.97, p < 0.05"; heterogeneity was high (I2 = 87.8%, p < 0.001).

"We found that VR significantly increased learners’ examination scores compared with traditional learning in the random-effects model (SMD = 0.53; 95% CI 0.09–0.97, p < 0.05; I2 = 87.8%)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• VR's score advantage over traditional methods (SMD = 0.81) does not hold against other 2D digital methods (SMD = 0.35, non-significant) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• VR benefits examination scores for medical students but not significantly for residents — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Meta-regression finds no significant moderators of VR's effect on anatomy examination scores — related
• Students report greater satisfaction with VR-based anatomy learning than with conventional or 2D methods — related
• VR module matched a textbook on anatomy knowledge at pre-, post- and retention testing while being rated more engaging and motivating (Stepan et al.) — reports the opposite
• A randomized controlled trial found VR and conventional 2D approaches both improved orthognathic diagnosis and treatment planning understanding with no significant difference between groups — reports the opposite
• 3D virtual-reality lecture was statistically non-inferior to 2D lecture on knowledge and rated better on spatial understanding and enjoyment (Kockro et al.) — related
• VR instruction shows a statistically significant difference in nursing students' practical skills versus traditional methods, though the pooled estimate is small (SMD = 0.15) — related
• VR improves motivation and performance of civil engineering students in a concrete structures course compared with traditional 2D drawings — related