VR-based training with radiation field visualization received significantly higher ratings for radiation understanding and visualization than conventional training (r=0.878)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i3 Students rated radiation understanding and visualization significantly higher after VR-based training (mean 4.70, SD 0.25) than conventional training (mean 1.85, SD 0.45), r=0.878, P<.001. → Kakimoto Akihiro 2026

Evidence¶

Kakimoto Akihiro 2026¶

Kakimoto Akihiro, Fujise Daisuke, Watanabe Shota, Otaka Yutaka, Minemoto Sakura, Yasumatsu Ayaka, Hasegawa Shin. (2026). Development and Educational Evaluation of a Radiation Visualization System in a Virtual Reality Training Module for Radiopharmaceutical Administration: Mixed Methods Study of Students’ Learning Experiences. JMIR Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.2196/104397

q2 · i3 · causal · r1

Within-participants quasi-experimental comparison of 20 radiological technology students completing both conventional cold-run and VR-based training; Wilcoxon signed-rank test, effect size r=0.878, P<.001. The authors note this "should therefore be interpreted as confirmation of the intended system functionality rather than independent evidence of educational superiority."

"For the (A) radiation understanding and visualization domain, the mean score for conventional training was 1.85 (SD 0.45), whereas VR-based training yielded a significantly higher mean score of 4.70 (SD 0.25)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Visual Processing — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Immersive technologies such as virtual reality should reinforce, not substitute, the original educational action — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Conventional training received significantly higher ratings for perceived realism and immersion than VR-based training (r=0.774) — related
• Qualitative analysis found radiation became perceptible in VR for all participants, while all reported operability differences favoring conventional training — related
• VR-based training received significantly higher ratings for medical safety awareness and radiation protection than conventional training (r=0.856) — related
• VR-based training received significantly higher ratings for learning satisfaction and self-evaluation than conventional training — related
• No significant differences between VR-based and conventional training in operational understanding, technical skills, or system usability — related
• A first evaluation of 3B confirms its conformance to critical usability requirements including safety and comfort, believability, simplicity, acceptability, extensibility, affordability, and mobility — related
• Increased perceptual fidelity fails to reliably improve serious game learning outcomes (the fidelity fallacy) — related
• Students trained with MPathic-VR report significantly more positive attitudes toward their learning experience than computer-based learning students — related