Claims

User-friendly XR systems are accessible to trainees with various levels of expertise (effort expectancy)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · 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? In terms of effort expectancy, user-friendly XR systems were accessible for trainees with various levels of expertise. → Esmaeel T 2024

Evidence

Esmaeel T 2024

Esmaeel T, Elham T, Fereidooni Mahsa, Ayatollahi Haleh. (2024). Acceptance and use of extended reality in surgical training: an umbrella review. Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02723-w

q2 · i? · review · r2

Descriptive synthesis of the 44 included reviews under the UTAUT effort expectancy domain. The review reports that "user-friendly systems were accessible for the trainees with various levels of expertise"; no effect sizes are printed.

"In terms of effort expectancy, user-friendly systems were accessible for the trainees with various levels of expertise."

Discussion

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.