Dataset Information

Virtual reality in medical students' education: a scoping review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Virtual reality (VR) is a technology that produces a virtual manifestation of the real world. In recent years, VR has been increasingly used as a tool in medical education. The use of VR in medical education has large potential, as it allows for distance learning and training which may be challenging to deliver in real life. VR encompasses different tools and applications. There is a need to explore how VR has been employed in medical education to date.

Objective

The objective of this scoping review is to conceptualise the VR tools available and the applications of VR in undergraduate medical education as reported in the literature. This scoping review will identify any gaps in this field and provide suggestions for future research.

Methods and analysis

The relevant studies will be examined using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework for scoping studies. A comprehensive search from a total of six electronic databases and grey literature sources will be performed. The reference list of included studies will be screened for additional studies. The screening and data extraction will be done in parallel and independently by two review authors. Any discrepancies will be resolved through consensus or discussion with a third review author. A data extraction form has been developed using key themes from the research questions. The extracted data will be qualitatively analysed and presented in a diagrammatic or tabular form, alongside a narrative summary, in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis: extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines.

Ethics and dissemination

All data will be collected from published and grey literature. Ethics approval is therefore not a requirement. We will present our findings at relevant conferences and submit them for publications in peer-reviewed journals.

SUBMITTER: Haowen J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8160201 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealth literacy enables the patients in understanding the basic healthcare information and taking informed health decisions; thus, it is a desirable goal of any healthcare system. It increases patients' adherence to treatment, improves the quality of care and eases the overall burden on the healthcare system. In recent years, technological solutions are being increasingly used in educating patients and achieving better health literacy. Augmented reality (AR) provides powerful, contextual and situated learning experiences and supplements the real world with virtual objects. AR could potentially be an effective learning methodology for the patients, thus, warranting a comprehensive overview of the current state of AR in patient education and health literacy.MethodsThe proposed scoping review will be based on the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley, including the refinements suggested by Levac et al. A systematic search for references in the published literature will be conducted in nine research databases-Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and Association for Information Systems eLibrary (AISeL). The unpublished studies from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Conference Proceedings Citation Index and grey literature references obtained from a web search will also be included. Databases will be searched from inception to 14 January 2020. Two independent reviewers will screen the studies from the search results in two successive stages of title/abstract screening followed by full-text screening. Data variables will be extracted from the selected studies to characterise study design, type of AR technology employed and the relational factors affecting patient education. Lastly, key stakeholders will be consulted to gather their insights about the study findings.Ethics and disseminationThe results will be disseminated through stakeholder meetings and conference presentations. The data used are from publicly available secondary sources, so this study does not require ethical review.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The collaborative care model is an approach providing care to those with mental health and addictions disorders in the primary care setting. There is a robust evidence base demonstrating its clinical and cost-effectiveness in comparison with usual care; however, the transitioning to this new paradigm of care has been difficult. While there are efforts to train and prepare healthcare professionals, not much is known about the current state of collaborative care training programmes. The objective of this scoping review is to understand how widespread these collaborative care education initiatives are, how they are implemented and their impacts. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The scoping review methodology uses the established review methodology by Arksey and O'Malley. The search strategy was developed by a medical librarian and will be applied in eight different databases spanning multiple disciplines. A two-stage screening process consisting of a title and abstract scan and a full-text review will be used to determine the eligibility of articles. To be included, articles must report on an existing collaborative care education initiative for healthcare providers. All articles will be independently assessed for eligibility by pairs of reviewers, and all eligible articles will be abstracted and charted in duplicate using a standardised form. The extracted data will undergo a 'narrative review' or a descriptive analysis of the contextual or process-oriented data and simple quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Research ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. The results of this scoping review will inform the development of a collaborative care training initiative emerging from the Medical Psychiatry Alliance, a four-institution philanthropic partnership in Ontario, Canada. The results will also be presented at relevant national and international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Project description:BackgroundAugmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), and virtual reality (VR), realized as head-mounted devices (HMDs), may open up new ways of teaching medical content for low-resource settings. The advantages are that HMDs enable repeated practice without adverse effects on the patient in various medical disciplines; may introduce new ways to learn complex medical content; and may alleviate financial, ethical, and supervisory constraints on the use of traditional medical learning materials, like cadavers and other skills lab equipment.ObjectiveWe examine the effectiveness of AR, MR, and VR HMDs for medical education, whereby we aim to incorporate a global health perspective comprising low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsWe conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) and Cochrane guidelines. Seven medical databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Science Direct, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Centre, and Google Scholar) were searched for peer-reviewed publications from January 1, 2014, to May 31, 2019. An extensive search was carried out to examine relevant literature guided by three concepts of extended reality (XR), which comprises the concepts of AR, MR, and VR, and the concepts of medicine and education. It included health professionals who took part in an HMD intervention that was compared to another teaching or learning method and evaluated with regard to its effectiveness. Quality and risk of bias were assessed with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education, and A Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions. We extracted relevant data and aggregated the data according to the main outcomes of this review (knowledge, skills, and XR HMD).ResultsA total of 27 studies comprising 956 study participants were included. The participants included all types of health care professionals, especially medical students (n=573, 59.9%) and residents (n=289, 30.2%). AR and VR implemented with HMDs were most often used for training in the fields of surgery (n=13, 48%) and anatomy (n=4, 15%). A range of study designs were used, and quantitative methods were clearly dominant (n=21, 78%). Training with AR- and VR-based HMDs was perceived as salient, motivating, and engaging. In the majority of studies (n=17, 63%), HMD-based interventions were found to be effective. A small number of included studies (n=4, 15%) indicated that HMDs were effective for certain aspects of medical skills and knowledge learning and training, while other studies suggested that HMDs were only viable as an additional teaching tool (n=4, 15%). Only 2 (7%) studies found no effectiveness in the use of HMDs.ConclusionsThe majority of included studies suggested that XR-based HMDs have beneficial effects for medical education, whereby only a minority of studies were from LMICs. Nevertheless, as most studies showed at least noninferior results when compared to conventional teaching and training, the results of this review suggest applicability and potential effectiveness in LMICs. Overall, users demonstrated greater enthusiasm and enjoyment in learning with XR-based HMDs. It has to be noted that many HMD-based interventions were small-scale and conducted as short-term pilots. To generate relevant evidence in the future, it is key to rigorously evaluate XR-based HMDs with AR and VR implementations, particularly in LMICs, to better understand the strengths and shortcomings of HMDs for medical education.

Project description:ObjectivesOver the last two decades, the number of scoping reviews in core medical education journals has increased by 4200%. Despite this growth, research on scoping reviews provides limited information about their nature, including how they are conducted or why medical educators undertake this knowledge synthesis type. This gap makes it difficult to know where the field stands and may hamper attempts to improve the conduct, reporting and utility of scoping reviews. Thus, this review characterises the nature of medical education scoping reviews to identify areas for improvement and highlight future research opportunities.MethodThe authors searched PubMed for scoping reviews published between 1/1999 and 4/2020 in 14 medical education journals. The authors extracted and summarised key bibliometric data, the rationales given for conducting a scoping review, the research questions and key reporting elements as described in the PRISMA-ScR. Rationales and research questions were mapped to Arksey and O'Malley's reasons for conducting a scoping review.ResultsOne hundred and one scoping reviews were included. On average, 10.1 scoping reviews (SD = 13.1, median = 4) were published annually with the most reviews published in 2019 (n = 42). Authors described multiple reasons for undertaking scoping reviews; the most prevalent being to summarise and disseminate research findings (n = 77). In 11 reviews, the rationales for the scoping review and the research questions aligned. No review addressed all elements of the PRISMA-ScR, with few authors publishing a protocol (n = 2) or including stakeholders (n = 20). Authors identified shortcomings of scoping reviews, including lack of critical appraisal.ConclusionsScoping reviews are increasingly conducted in medical education and published by most core journals. Scoping reviews aim to map the depth and breadth of emerging topics; as such, they have the potential to play a critical role in the practice, policy and research of medical education. However, these results suggest improvements are needed for this role to be fully realised.

Project description:Introduction Preclinical Alzheimer’s disease (AD) represents the earliest phase of AD, often years before the onset of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). There is a pressing focus on identifying individuals in the preclinical AD phase to alter the trajectory or impact of the disease potentially. Increasingly, Virtual Reality (VR) technology is being used to support a diagnosis of AD. While VR technology has been applied to the assessment of MCI and AD, studies about how best to utilize VR as a screening tool for preclinical AD are limited and discordant. The objectives of this review are to synthesize the evidence pertaining to the use of VR as a screening tool for preclinical AD as well as to identify factors that need to be considered when utilizing VR to screen for preclinical AD. Methods and analysis The methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) will be introduced to guide the conduction of the scoping review, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) (2018) will be used to organize and structure the review. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar will be used to search for literature. Obtained studies will be screened for eligibility based on predefined exclusion criteria. A narrative synthesis of eligible studies will be performed, after tabulating the extracted data from existing literature, to answer the research questions. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required for this scoping review. Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, publication in a peer-reviewed journal, and discussions among professional networks in the research domain combining neuroscience and information and communications technology (ICT). Registration details This protocol has been registered on Open Science Framework (OSF). Relevant materials and potential following updates are available at https://osf.io/aqmyu.