Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

DrLorainneTudor Car

Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health

Honorary Senior Research Fellow
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

l.tudor.car

 
 
//

Location

 

Reynolds BuildingCharing Cross Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Tudor:2022:10.2196/29594,
author = {Tudor, Car L and Kyaw, BM and Teo, A and Fox, TE and Vimalesvaran, S and Apfelbacher, C and Kemp, S and Chavannes, N},
doi = {10.2196/29594},
journal = {JMIR Serious Games},
title = {Outcomes, measurement instruments and their validity evidence in randomised trials on virtual, augmented and mixed reality in undergraduate medical education: a systematic mapping review},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/29594},
volume = {10},
year = {2022}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - Background: Extended reality, encompassing virtual, augmented and mixed reality, is increasingly used in medical education. Studies assessing effectiveness of these new educational modalities should measure relevant outcomes using outcome measurement tools with validity evidence. Our aim was to determine the choice of outcomes, measurement instruments and the use of measurement instruments with validity evidence in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR) in medical student education.Methods: We conducted a systematic mapping review. We searched seven major bibliographic databases from January 1990 to April 2020. Two reviewers screened the citations and extracted data independently from the included studies. We report our findings in line with PRISMA guidelines.Results: Of 127 retrieved RCTs, 116 were on VR, eleven on AR. No RCTs on MR in medical student education were found. Of the studies on VR, 64 studies were on VR simulators, 31 studies on screen-based VR, 9 on VR patient simulations and 12 on VR serious games. Most studies reported only one outcome and immediate, post-intervention assessment data. Skills outcome was the most common outcome in studies on VR simulators, VR patient simulations and AR. Knowledge was the most common outcome in studies on screen-based VR and VR serious games. Less common outcomes included participants’ attitudes, satisfaction, cognitive or mental load, learning efficacy, engagement and/or self-efficacy beliefs, emotional state, competency developed and patient outcomes. At least one form of validity evidence was found in around half of the studies on VR simulator, VR patient simulations, VR serious games and AR, and in only a quarter of studies on screen-based VR. Most studies used assessment methods that were implemented in a non-digital format such as paper-based written exercises or in-person assessments where examiners observed performan
AU  - Tudor,Car L
AU  - Kyaw,BM
AU  - Teo,A
AU  - Fox,TE
AU  - Vimalesvaran,S
AU  - Apfelbacher,C
AU  - Kemp,S
AU  - Chavannes,N
DO  - 10.2196/29594
PY  - 2022///
SN  - 2291-9279
TI  - Outcomes, measurement instruments and their validity evidence in randomised trials on virtual, augmented and mixed reality in undergraduate medical education: a systematic mapping review
T2  - JMIR Serious Games
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/29594
UR  - https://games.jmir.org/2022/2/e29594
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/93522
VL  - 10
ER  -
Download