VR is implemented both as an automated independent assessment tool and as a supporting tool evaluated by human examiners¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In 17 studies (65%) VR performed the evaluation without human intervention as an automated assessment tool; in four studies (15%) evaluation was carried out by human examiners within VR. → Neher Andrea N. 2025

Evidence¶

Neher Andrea N. 2025¶

Neher Andrea N., Bühlmann Florian, Müller Martin, Berendonk Christoph, Sauter Thomas C., Birrenbach Tanja. (2025). Virtual reality for assessment in undergraduate nursing and medical education – a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06867-8

q3 · i? · review · r3

Review synthesis of implementation modes across the 26 included studies. The review reports that in 17 studies (65%) VR served as "an automated and independent assessment tool", while in four studies human examiners evaluated performance within VR.

"Two different ways were used to implement VR: in 17 studies (65%) as an automated and independent assessment tool, meaning it performed the evaluation without human intervention [11, 23–29, 31–33, 37–39, 42, 43, 46], and four times (15%) as a supporting assessment tool [40, 41, 44, 45], where the assessment took place in VR but the evaluation was carried out by human examiners instead (see Table 1)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Immersive VR assessments of nursing and medical students are concentrated in settings that are difficult to replicate, especially emergencies — related
• Automated VR assessment could reduce examiner workload and increase objectivity in OSCE-style practical exams — related