Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 259

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 116 of the 116 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Virtual Reality in Medical Students’ Education: Scoping Review

Open access
Jiang, Haowen, Vimalesvaran, Sunitha, Wang, Jeremy King, Lim, Kee Boon, Mogali, Sreenivasulu Reddy, Car, Lorainne Tudor·2022·JMIR Medical Education
DOI 10.2196/34860
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Virtual reality (VR) produces a virtual manifestation of the real world and has been shown to be useful as a digital education modality. As VR encompasses different modalities, tools, and applications, there is a need to explore how VR has been used in medical education. Objective: The objective of this scoping review is to map existing research on the use of VR in undergraduate medical education and to identify areas of future research. Methods: We performed a search of 4 bibliographic databases in December 2020. Data were extracted using a standardized data extraction form. The study was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and reported in line with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Results: Of the 114 included studies, 69 (60.5%) reported the use of commercially available surgical VR simulators. Other VR modalities included 3D models (15/114, 13.2%) and virtual worlds (20/114, 17.5%), which were mainly used for anatomy education. Most of the VR modalities included were semi-immersive (68/114, 59.6%) and were of high interactivity (79/114, 69.3%). There is limited evidence on the use of more novel VR modalities, such as mobile VR and virtual dissection tables (8/114, 7%), as well as the use of VR for nonsurgical and nonpsychomotor skills training (20/114, 17.5%) or in a group setting (16/114, 14%). Only 2.6% (3/114) of the studies reported the use of conceptual frameworks or theories in the design of VR. Conclusions: Despite the extensive research available on VR in medical education, there continue to be important gaps in the evidence. Future studies should explore the use of VR for the development of nonpsychomotor skills and in areas other than surgery and anatomy. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046986

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 · 10.2196/34860

Cites

116 of 116 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

Cited by

See all 259

Metadata

Authors
Jiang, H., Vimalesvaran, S., Wang, J. K., Lim, K. B., Mogali, S. R., & Car, L. T.
Venue
JMIR Medical Education
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2022-02-02
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
e34860
ISSN
2369-3762 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/34860
OpenAlex
W4200105386
Cited by
259
References
116
FWCI
23.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

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.