Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,040

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy

Open access
Moro, Christian, Štromberga, Zane, Raikos, Athanasios, Stirling, Allan·2017·Anatomical Sciences Education

Abstract

Although cadavers constitute the gold standard for teaching anatomy to medical and health science students, there are substantial financial, ethical, and supervisory constraints on their use. In addition, although anatomy remains one of the fundamental areas of medical education, universities have decreased the hours allocated to teaching gross anatomy in favor of applied clinical work. The release of virtual (VR) and augmented reality (AR) devices allows learning to occur through hands‐on immersive experiences. The aim of this research was to assess whether learning structural anatomy utilizing VR or AR is as effective as tablet‐based (TB) applications, and whether these modes allowed enhanced student learning, engagement and performance. Participants (n = 59) were randomly allocated to one of the three learning modes: VR, AR, or TB and completed a lesson on skull anatomy, after which they completed an anatomical knowledge assessment. Student perceptions of each learning mode and any adverse effects experienced were recorded. No significant differences were found between mean assessment scores in VR, AR, or TB. During the lessons however, VR participants were more likely to exhibit adverse effects such as headaches (25% in VR P < 0.05), dizziness (40% in VR, P < 0.001), or blurred vision (35% in VR, P < 0.01). Both VR and AR are as valuable for teaching anatomy as tablet devices, but also promote intrinsic benefits such as increased learner immersion and engagement. These outcomes show great promise for the effective use of virtual and augmented reality as means to supplement lesson content in anatomical education. Anat Sci Educ 10: 549–559. © 2017 American Association of Anatomists.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ase.1696

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Cited by

See all 1,040

Metadata

Authors
Moro, C., Štromberga, Z., Raikos, A., & Stirling, A.
Venue
Anatomical Sciences Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-04-17
Volume
10
Issue
6
Pages
549-559
ISSN
  • 1935-9772 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-9780
OpenAlex
W2605897185
Cited by
1,040
References
9
FWCI
24.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ase.1696
The paper
Moro, C., Štromberga, Z., Raikos, A., & Stirling, A. (2017). The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy. Anatomical Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1696

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.