MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791831483 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20170110

Immersive and interactive virtual reality to improve learning and retention of neuroanatomy in medical students: a randomized controlled study

2018· article· en· W2791831483 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Chelsea Ekstrand, Ali Fatah Bin Jamal, Ron Nguyen, Annalise Kudryk, Jennifer Mann, Ivar Mendez

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsVirtual realityNeuroanatomyTest (biology)Virtual microscopyVirtual trainingRandomized controlled trialPsychologyMedical educationMultimediaMedicineComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionNeurosciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Spatial 3-dimensional understanding of the brain is essential to learning neuroanatomy, and 3-dimensional learning techniques have been proposed as tools to enhance neuroanatomy training. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of immersive virtual-reality neuroanatomy training and compare it to traditional paper-based methods. METHODS: In this randomized controlled study, participants consisted of first- or second-year medical students from the University of Saskatchewan recruited via email and posters displayed throughout the medical school. Participants were randomly assigned to the virtual-reality group or the paper-based group and studied the spatial relations between neural structures for 12 minutes after performing a neuroanatomy baseline test, with both test and control questions. A postintervention test was administered immediately after the study period and 5-9 days later. Satisfaction measures were obtained. RESULTS: Of the 66 participants randomly assigned to the study groups, 64 were included in the final analysis, 31 in the virtual-reality group and 33 in the paper-based group. The 2 groups performed comparably on the baseline questions and showed significant performance improvement on the test questions following study. There were no significant differences between groups for the control questions, the postintervention test questions or the 7-day postintervention test questions. Satisfaction survey results indicated that neurophobia was decreased. INTERPRETATION: Results from this study provide evidence that training in neuroanatomy in an immersive and interactive virtual-reality environment may be an effective neuroanatomy learning tool that warrants further study. They also suggest that integration of virtual-reality into neuroanatomy training may improve knowledge retention, increase study motivation and decrease neurophobia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations188
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207