Teaching InnovationNCT06739590
Effectiveness of Teacher-Student Interactive Immersive Mixed Reality Technology on Anatomy Education
A study testing Learning with CT scans, Learning with 3D visualization models and Learning with 3D-MR visualization models in people with Teaching Innovation and Medical Education, run by Zhujiang Hospital at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
Background: Novice surgeons often struggle to translate anatomical knowledge into clinical practice, primarily due to a lack of resources, significant variability in anatomical structures, and limited hands-on experience. These challenges can lead to considerable deficiencies in clinical performance. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Teaching Innovation, Medical Education, Anatomy Education
- What is being tested?
- Learning with CT scans, Learning with 3D visualization models and Learning with 3D-MR visualization models
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 66 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 7 Dec 2024to 27 Dec 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Full-time undergraduate clinical medicine students
- Postgraduate and trainees from accredited residency programs.
Who cannot join
- Participants who had previously used the new technology or similar simulators
- Participants lacking clinical anatomy learning experience.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
China1 site
Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510280
About this study
Official title: Impact of Teacher-Student Interactive Immersive Mixed Reality (MR) Technology on the Effectiveness of Hepatobiliary Anatomy Education for Medical Students: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Background:
Novice surgeons often struggle to translate anatomical knowledge into clinical practice, primarily due to a lack of resources, significant variability in anatomical structures, and limited hands-on experience. These challenges can lead to considerable deficiencies in clinical performance. Traditional educational methods, such as textbooks and CT imaging, frequently fall short in offering the depth necessary for effective application in surgical settings. Recent technological advancements, particularly in Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and Mixed Reality (MR), are revolutionizing surgical education by creating immersive learning environments. In complex fields like hepatobiliary surgery, the integration of MR allows for enhanced visualization of anatomical details, improving the understanding of vascular structures and tumor localization, which consequently boosts surgical training outcomes. However, most research to date has analyzed these technologies in isolation, with few studies investigating their collaborative benefits or effective integration into educational curricula.
Read more
This study aims to evaluate cognitive learning outcomes related to anatomical structures by employing various modalities, including traditional medical imaging, 3D models, and 3D-MR. Through cross-comparative analyses, investigators will assess the correlation between test scores and actual clinical performance, thereby gauging the impact of these modalities on the comprehension of intricate anatomical structures and their spatial visualization skills. Ultimately, this study aspire to develop a comprehensive anatomical teaching program that incorporates MR and 3D models to demonstrate the feasibility and efficacy of these innovative technologies in teaching liver and gallbladder anatomy.
Research Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of learning outcomes in anatomical structure learning between MR 3D modelling and general medical imaging, and to investigate which modalities lead to higher anatomical learning outcomes (primary outcome).
Hypothesis: Compared to plain images, 3D models of MR simulators can significantly improve learning performance, achieve better learning outcomes
Read the detailed description
Background:
Effective surgical planning in hepatobiliary surgery requires a deep understanding of complex anatomical structures, fraught with variations and anomalies. Mastery of the intricate spatial relationships among these structures poses considerable challenges, especially for novice surgeons striving to acquire essential skills. Traditional educational materials, including textbooks and CT images, often lack the necessary depth for effective application. As a result, many novice surgeons face difficulties in translating anatomical knowledge into clinical practice during preoperative planning. Additionally, a scarcity of hands-on experience in real surgical environments exacerbates these issues, creating knowledge gaps that may compromise clinical performance.
Fortunately, advancements in technology are paving the way for improved surgical education. Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and Mixed Reality (MR) have emerged as revolutionary tools in this arena, particularly for distance learning. Recent innovations have fostered immersive learning environments that enhance the educational experience for both surgical educators and students. The integration of these immersive technologies with 3D modeling holds significant potential for medical anatomy education. Research indicates that transforming 2D images into 3D VR models significantly enhances the intuitive understanding of anatomical structures. Compared to traditional educational methods, this approach improves knowledge retention and supports more effective memory formation.
In the realm of hepatobiliary surgery, which involves intricate vascular and anatomical features, there is increasing focus on utilizing immersive technologies. MR technology allows for enhanced visualization of liver anatomy, improving the understanding of vascular structures and tumor localization, ultimately benefiting surgical training. VR technology provides real-time interaction with 3D simulated environments, making it a critical tool for advancing surgical knowledge and skills. Meanwhile, AR enhances the educational experience, while MR and VR collectively facilitate a comprehensive visualization of the complex structures of liver.
Purpose of the Study:
Despite the potential benefits of integrating these technologies into clinical practice, existing studies primarily utilize 3D or 3D-VR technologies in isolation, often comparing them only to traditional methods. Few investigations address the combined effects of these modalities, leading to inconsistent integration into training programs and challenging learning curves for novice surgeons. Additionally, the absence of robust quantitative assessment tools limits the theoretical support for these educational methodologies.
Consequently, this study aims to establish a framework for teaching anatomy that incorporates MR and 3D models. The research will assess the influence of these innovative technologies on comprehension of intricate anatomical structures and their spatial visualization abilities regarding three-dimensional forms. Ultimately, our goal is to confirm the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating these advanced technologies into hepatobiliary anatomy education.
Research Goals:
Evaluate cognitive learning outcomes related to anatomical structures using diverse learning modalities, including traditional medical imaging, 3D modeling, and 3D-MR.
Test the effectiveness of different modalities in learning hepatobiliary anatomical structures through cross-comparisons, verifying the correlation between scores and actual performance.
Design:
This is a three-arm, partially blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing the learning outcomes associated with 3D models and 3D-MR for teaching hepatic and gallbladder anatomy.
Participants: Medical students who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria and have no prior experience interpreting hepatobiliary surgical imaging.
Tasks: Experts will issue relevant test questions on hepatobiliary surgery anatomy, and learning outcomes across different modalities will be evaluated based on test scores.
Intervention: A randomized allocation method will divide participants into a control group and a new technology group. The three groups will receive instruction on the anatomy of the hepatobiliary system through different methodologies.
- Control group: Engages with routine CT and MR imaging for anatomical structure learning.
- New technology group:
3D group: Learns anatomical structures using 2D and 3D models in a computer environment.
MR group: Engages in anatomical structure learning utilizing 3D models within an MR simulator.
- Conditions
- Teaching Innovation, Medical Education, Anatomy Education
- Being tested
- Learning with CT scans, Learning with 3D visualization models, Learning with 3D-MR visualization models
- Keywords
- Medical Education, Anatomy, Teaching Innovation, Surgeon Training, Mixed Reality
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Learning with CT scansBehavioural
The average performance improvement in this group will serve as the baseline for learning achievable through conventional CT and MR imaging alone.
Learning with 3D visualization modelsBehavioural
Learning anatomical structures using three-dimensional visualization models displayed on a computer.
Learning with 3D-MR visualization modelsRadiation
Viewing and manipulating 3D visualization models to learn anatomical structures using the MR headset.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control Group | Placebo comparator | 21 participants were allocated to this group. They completed a background questionnaire and assessed their baseline emotions using the Medical Emotions Scale (MES) before commencing the study. Participants then took a pre-study test assessing their spatial knowledge of hepatobiliary anatomy and a surgical planning component, based on their assigned group. Following the learning process on a sample case, they retook the MES and subsequently completed a test on the designated test cases. Receives: Behavioral: Learning with CT scans |
| 3D Group | Experimental | 23 participants were allocated to this group. They completed a background questionnaire and assessed their baseline emotions using the MES prior to the study. They then completed a pre-study test focused on spatial knowledge of hepatobiliary anatomy and surgical planning. After engaging with the sample case, participants retook the MES and completed a test on the specified test cases.
Intervention：Learning anatomical structures using three-dimensional visualization models displayed on a computer. Receives: Behavioral: Learning with 3D visualization models |
| MR Group | Experimental | 22 participants were allocated to this group. Participants completed a background questionnaire and assessed their baseline emotions using the MES before the study commenced. They participated in a training tutorial on utilizing the MR headset and completed a pre-study test evaluating spatial knowledge of hepatobiliary anatomy and surgical planning. After the learning process with the sample case, participants retook the MES, completed a test on the designated test cases, and filled out a post-use adverse reaction scale for the MR device.
Intervention：Viewing and manipulating 3D visualization models to learn anatomical structures using the MR headset. Receives: Radiation: Learning with 3D-MR visualization models |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Anatomical knowledge
Anatomists create relevant test questions and assess performance of participants; by comparing the results of baseline and post-study score of the Anatomy and Surgical Competence Test. The improvement in test scores serves as an indicator for evaluating learning outcomes.
Measured: Before and after the completion of the learning process, an average of 1 day
Secondary outcomes (1)
Differences in Emotional Intensity
Participants independently completed the Medical Emotions Scale (MES) both before and after the learning process to assess the intensity of their emotions.
The Medical Emotions Scale consists of twenty-two single-item adjectives designed to assess state emotions across four categories: basic, achievement, epistemic, and social emotions. These emotions are organized into five sub-scales based on their valence (pleasant or unpleasant) and activation (level of physiological arousal): (1) positive activating, (2) positive deactivating, (3) negative activating, (4) negative deactivating, and (5) neutral. Each emotion is scored according to its intensity, with higher scores indicating a greater intensity or strength of the emotion.
Measured: Before and after the completion of the learning process, an average of 1 day
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Dec 2024
- Study start7 Dec 2024
- Primary completion21 Dec 2024
- Study completion27 Dec 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Teaching InnovationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Zhujiang HospitalThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Stratified Randomized Block Design
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 66 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Zhujiang Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Southern Medical University, China
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06739590
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024-KY-413-01
- Status last verified
- Aug 2024
- First submitted
- 10 Sep 2024
- Last updated
- 9 Apr 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Data obtained from primary and secondary outcomes may be shared if other researchers have an interest in this data.
Publications
Balci D, Kirimker EO, Raptis DA, Gao Y, Kow AWC. Uses of a dedicated 3D reconstruction software with augmented and mixed reality in planning and performing advanced liver surgery and living donor liver transplantation (with videos). Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2022 Oct;21(5):455-461. doi: 10.1016/j.hbpd.2022.09.001. Epub 2022 Sep 8.
PubMed 36123242Moro C, Stromberga Z, Raikos A, Stirling A. The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2017 Nov;10(6):549-559. doi: 10.1002/ase.1696. Epub 2017 Apr 17.
PubMed 28419750Mateen M, Kan CYP. Education during COVID-19: Ready, headset, go! Clin Teach. 2021 Feb;18(1):90-91. doi: 10.1111/tct.13266. Epub 2020 Oct 2. No abstract available.
PubMed 33006439Kolla S, Elgawly M, Gaughan JP, Goldman E. Medical Student Perception of a Virtual Reality Training Module for Anatomy Education. Med Sci Educ. 2020 Jun 9;30(3):1201-1210. doi: 10.1007/s40670-020-00993-2. eCollection 2020 Sep.
PubMed 34457783Alharbi Y, Al-Mansour M, Al-Saffar R, Garman A, Alraddadi A. Three-dimensional Virtual Reality as an Innovative Teaching and Learning Tool for Human Anatomy Courses in Medical Education: A Mixed Methods Study. Cureus. 2020 Feb 24;12(2):e7085. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7085.
PubMed 32226686Ammanuel S, Brown I, Uribe J, Rehani B. Creating 3D models from Radiologic Images for Virtual Reality Medical Education Modules. J Med Syst. 2019 May 3;43(6):166. doi: 10.1007/s10916-019-1308-3.
PubMed 31053902
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Apr 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Impact of Teacher-Student Interactive Immersive Mixed Reality (MR) Technology on the Effectiveness of Hepatobiliary Anatomy Education for Medical Students: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06739590
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2024-KY-413-01
- Conditions
- Teaching Innovation, Medical Education, Anatomy Education
- Keywords
- Medical Education, Anatomy, Teaching Innovation, Surgeon Training, Mixed Reality
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 66 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Zhujiang HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Southern Medical University, China
- Study start
- 7 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 21 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 27 Dec 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background:
Novice surgeons often struggle to translate anatomical knowledge into clinical practice, primarily due to a lack of resources, significant variability in anatomical structures, and limited hands-on experience. These challenges can lead to considerable deficiencies in clinical performance. Traditional educational methods, such as textbooks and CT imaging, frequently fall short in offering the depth necessary for effective application in surgical settings. Recent technological advancements, particularly in Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and Mixed Reality (MR), are revolutionizing surgical education by creating immersive learning environments. In complex fields like hepatobiliary surgery, the integration of MR allows for enhanced visualization of anatomical details, improving the understanding of vascular structures and tumor localization, which consequently boosts surgical training outcomes. However, most research to date has analyzed these technologies in isolation, with few studies investigating their collaborative benefits or effective integration into educational curricula.
This study aims to evaluate cognitive learning outcomes related to anatomical structures by employing various modalities, including traditional medical imaging, 3D models, and 3D-MR. Through cross-comparative analyses, investigators will assess the correlation between test scores and actual clinical performance, thereby gauging the impact of these modalities on the comprehension of intricate anatomical structures and their spatial visualization skills. Ultimately, this study aspire to develop a comprehensive anatomical teaching program that incorporates MR and 3D models to demonstrate the feasibility and efficacy of these innovative technologies in teaching liver and gallbladder anatomy.
Research Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of learning outcomes in anatomical structure learning between MR 3D modelling and general medical imaging, and to investigate which modalities lead to higher anatomical learning outcomes (primary outcome).
Hypothesis: Compared to plain images, 3D models of MR simulators can significantly improve learning performance, achieve better learning outcomes
Detailed description
Background:
Effective surgical planning in hepatobiliary surgery requires a deep understanding of complex anatomical structures, fraught with variations and anomalies. Mastery of the intricate spatial relationships among these structures poses considerable challenges, especially for novice surgeons striving to acquire essential skills. Traditional educational materials, including textbooks and CT images, often lack the necessary depth for effective application. As a result, many novice surgeons face difficulties in translating anatomical knowledge into clinical practice during preoperative planning. Additionally, a scarcity of hands-on experience in real surgical environments exacerbates these issues, creating knowledge gaps that may compromise clinical performance.
Fortunately, advancements in technology are paving the way for improved surgical education. Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and Mixed Reality (MR) have emerged as revolutionary tools in this arena, particularly for distance learning. Recent innovations have fostered immersive learning environments that enhance the educational experience for both surgical educators and students. The integration of these immersive technologies with 3D modeling holds significant potential for medical anatomy education. Research indicates that transforming 2D images into 3D VR models significantly enhances the intuitive understanding of anatomical structures. Compared to traditional educational methods, this approach improves knowledge retention and supports more effective memory formation.
In the realm of hepatobiliary surgery, which involves intricate vascular and anatomical features, there is increasing focus on utilizing immersive technologies. MR technology allows for enhanced visualization of liver anatomy, improving the understanding of vascular structures and tumor localization, ultimately benefiting surgical training. VR technology provides real-time interaction with 3D simulated environments, making it a critical tool for advancing surgical knowledge and skills. Meanwhile, AR enhances the educational experience, while MR and VR collectively facilitate a comprehensive visualization of the complex structures of liver.
Purpose of the Study:
Despite the potential benefits of integrating these technologies into clinical practice, existing studies primarily utilize 3D or 3D-VR technologies in isolation, often comparing them only to traditional methods. Few investigations address the combined effects of these modalities, leading to inconsistent integration into training programs and challenging learning curves for novice surgeons. Additionally, the absence of robust quantitative assessment tools limits the theoretical support for these educational methodologies.
Consequently, this study aims to establish a framework for teaching anatomy that incorporates MR and 3D models. The research will assess the influence of these innovative technologies on comprehension of intricate anatomical structures and their spatial visualization abilities regarding three-dimensional forms. Ultimately, our goal is to confirm the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating these advanced technologies into hepatobiliary anatomy education.
Research Goals:
Evaluate cognitive learning outcomes related to anatomical structures using diverse learning modalities, including traditional medical imaging, 3D modeling, and 3D-MR.
Test the effectiveness of different modalities in learning hepatobiliary anatomical structures through cross-comparisons, verifying the correlation between scores and actual performance.
Design:
This is a three-arm, partially blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing the learning outcomes associated with 3D models and 3D-MR for teaching hepatic and gallbladder anatomy.
Participants: Medical students who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria and have no prior experience interpreting hepatobiliary surgical imaging.
Tasks: Experts will issue relevant test questions on hepatobiliary surgery anatomy, and learning outcomes across different modalities will be evaluated based on test scores.
Intervention: A randomized allocation method will divide participants into a control group and a new technology group. The three groups will receive instruction on the anatomy of the hepatobiliary system through different methodologies.
- Control group: Engages with routine CT and MR imaging for anatomical structure learning.
- New technology group:
3D group: Learns anatomical structures using 2D and 3D models in a computer environment.
MR group: Engages in anatomical structure learning utilizing 3D models within an MR simulator.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- Stratified Randomized Block Design
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control Group | Placebo comparator | Behavioral: Learning with CT scans21 participants were allocated to this group. They completed a background questionnaire and assessed their baseline emotions using the Medical Emotions Scale (MES) before commencing the study. Participants then took a pre-study test assessing their spatial knowledge of hepatobiliary anatomy and a surgical planning component, based on their assigned group. Following the learning process on a sample case, they retook the MES and subsequently completed a test on the designated test cases. |
| 3D Group | Experimental | Behavioral: Learning with 3D visualization models23 participants were allocated to this group. They completed a background questionnaire and assessed their baseline emotions using the MES prior to the study. They then completed a pre-study test focused on spatial knowledge of hepatobiliary anatomy and surgical planning. After engaging with the sample case, participants retook the MES and completed a test on the specified test cases. Intervention：Learning anatomical structures using three-dimensional visualization models displayed on a computer. |
| MR Group | Experimental | Radiation: Learning with 3D-MR visualization models22 participants were allocated to this group. Participants completed a background questionnaire and assessed their baseline emotions using the MES before the study commenced. They participated in a training tutorial on utilizing the MR headset and completed a pre-study test evaluating spatial knowledge of hepatobiliary anatomy and surgical planning. After the learning process with the sample case, participants retook the MES, completed a test on the designated test cases, and filled out a post-use adverse reaction scale for the MR device. Intervention：Viewing and manipulating 3D visualization models to learn anatomical structures using the MR headset. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Full-time undergraduate clinical medicine students
- Postgraduate and trainees from accredited residency programs.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Participants who had previously used the new technology or similar simulators
- Participants lacking clinical anatomy learning experience.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Learning with CT scansThe average performance improvement in this group will serve as the baseline for learning achievable through conventional CT and MR imaging alone. | Behavioural | Control Group |
| Learning with 3D visualization modelsLearning anatomical structures using three-dimensional visualization models displayed on a computer. | Behavioural | 3D Group |
| Learning with 3D-MR visualization modelsViewing and manipulating 3D visualization models to learn anatomical structures using the MR headset. | Radiation | MR Group |
Primary outcome
Anatomical knowledge
Time frame: Before and after the completion of the learning process, an average of 1 day
Anatomists create relevant test questions and assess performance of participants; by comparing the results of baseline and post-study score of the Anatomy and Surgical Competence Test. The improvement in test scores serves as an indicator for evaluating learning outcomes.
1 secondary outcome
Differences in Emotional Intensity
Time frame: Before and after the completion of the learning process, an average of 1 day
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Apr 2025.
- Background: PubMed 36123242Balci D, Kirimker EO, Raptis DA, Gao Y, Kow AWC. Uses of a dedicated 3D reconstruction software with augmented and mixed reality in planning and performing advanced liver surgery and living donor liver transplantation (with videos). Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2022 Oct;21(5):455-461. doi: 10.1016/j.hbpd.2022.09.001. Epub 2022 Sep 8.
- Background: PubMed 28419750Moro C, Stromberga Z, Raikos A, Stirling A. The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2017 Nov;10(6):549-559. doi: 10.1002/ase.1696. Epub 2017 Apr 17.
- Background: PubMed 33006439Mateen M, Kan CYP. Education during COVID-19: Ready, headset, go! Clin Teach. 2021 Feb;18(1):90-91. doi: 10.1111/tct.13266. Epub 2020 Oct 2. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 34457783Kolla S, Elgawly M, Gaughan JP, Goldman E. Medical Student Perception of a Virtual Reality Training Module for Anatomy Education. Med Sci Educ. 2020 Jun 9;30(3):1201-1210. doi: 10.1007/s40670-020-00993-2. eCollection 2020 Sep.
- Background: PubMed 32226686Alharbi Y, Al-Mansour M, Al-Saffar R, Garman A, Alraddadi A. Three-dimensional Virtual Reality as an Innovative Teaching and Learning Tool for Human Anatomy Courses in Medical Education: A Mixed Methods Study. Cureus. 2020 Feb 24;12(2):e7085. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7085.
- Background: PubMed 31053902Ammanuel S, Brown I, Uribe J, Rehani B. Creating 3D models from Radiologic Images for Virtual Reality Medical Education Modules. J Med Syst. 2019 May 3;43(6):166. doi: 10.1007/s10916-019-1308-3.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Data obtained from primary and secondary outcomes may be shared if other researchers have an interest in this data.
Related trials for Teaching Innovation
RecruitingObservational study
Mental Health and Innovation for French Higher-education Students
Mental Health, Neurodevelomental Disorders
Not yet recruiting
Health Nanotechnology Education for Nursing Interns
Nursing Education
Recruiting
Effect of Visual Deprivation of the Team Leader on Team Performance During Simulated Medical Emergencies
High Fidelity Simulation Training, Randomized Controlled Trials
Recruiting
Comparing Mixed Reality, Video-Based, and Instructor-Led Training for Nasogastric Tube Insertion in Nursing Students
Education, Nursing Students, Clinical Competence
Recruiting
Diabetes Learning in Virtual Environments Just in Time for Community Reentry
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Learning with CT scans, Learning with 3D visualization models and Learning with 3D-MR visualization models in people with Teaching Innovation and Medical Education, run by Zhujiang Hospital at 1 site in China.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Apr 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Anatomical knowledge (time frame: Before and after the completion of the learning process, an average of 1 day). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06739590, which also lists 6 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Apr 2025.