Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 27, 2025
04:12
Mixed Reality for Education MRE Implementation and Results in Online Classes for Engineering
Published on: June 23, 2023
763
Outcomes, Measurement Instruments, and Their Validity Evidence in Randomized Controlled Trials on Virtual, Augmented,
Lorainne Tudor Car1,2, Bhone Myint Kyaw3, Andrew Teo1
1Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.
JMIR Serious Games
|April 13, 2022
Summary
Randomized controlled trials on extended reality in medical education primarily assess skills and knowledge using non-digital methods. Future studies should broaden outcome measures and incorporate digital assessments with validity evidence.
Area of Science:
- Medical Education Technology
- Extended Reality in Healthcare
- Research Methodology in Medicine
Background:
- Extended reality (XR), including virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR), is increasingly adopted in medical training.
- Evaluating the efficacy of XR in medical education necessitates the use of validated outcome measurement tools.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review the outcomes, measurement instruments, and validity evidence used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating VR, AR, and MR in medical student education.
- To identify trends and gaps in the assessment of XR effectiveness in medical education.
Main Methods:
- A systematic mapping review was conducted, searching seven major bibliographic databases from January 1990 to April 2020.
- Data extraction and citation screening were performed independently by two reviewers, adhering to PRISMA guidelines.
Main Results:
- Out of 126 RCTs, 115 focused on VR and 11 on AR; no MR RCTs were found. Skills and knowledge were the most frequently reported outcomes.
- Approximately half of the studies reported validity evidence for their measurement instruments. Most assessments were non-digital (e.g., paper-based, in-person observation).
- VR simulators and AR studies predominantly reported skills outcomes, while screen-based VR and VR serious games focused on knowledge.
Conclusions:
- Current RCTs on VR and AR in medical education report limited outcomes, primarily skills and knowledge, with immediate post-intervention data.
- Assessment methods are predominantly non-digital, and validity evidence for measurement tools is inconsistently reported.
- Future research should encompass a wider array of outcomes, emphasize the reporting of validity evidence, and explore digitally implemented assessments.
