Literature DB >> 31887792

The Effect of Stereoscopic Augmented Reality Visualization on Learning Anatomy and the Modifying Effect of Visual-Spatial Abilities: A Double-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.

Katerina Bogomolova1,2, Ineke J M van der Ham3, Mary E W Dankbaar4, Walter W van den Broek4, Steven E R Hovius5,6, Jos A van der Hage1,2, Beerend P Hierck2,7,8,9.   

Abstract

Monoscopically projected three-dimensional (3D) visualization technology may have significant disadvantages for students with lower visual-spatial abilities despite its overall effectiveness in teaching anatomy. Previous research suggests that stereopsis may facilitate a better comprehension of anatomical knowledge. This study evaluated the educational effectiveness of stereoscopic augmented reality (AR) visualization and the modifying effect of visual-spatial abilities on learning. In a double-center randomized controlled trial, first- and second-year (bio)medical undergraduates studied lower limb anatomy with stereoscopic 3D AR model (n = 20), monoscopic 3D desktop model (n = 20), or two-dimensional (2D) anatomical atlas (n = 18). Visual-spatial abilities were tested with Mental Rotation Test (MRT), Paper Folding Test (PFT), and Mechanical Reasoning (MR) Test. Anatomical knowledge was assessed by the validated 30-item paper posttest. The overall posttest scores in the stereoscopic 3D AR group (47.8%) were similar to those in the monoscopic 3D desktop group (38.5%; P = 0.240) and the 2D anatomical atlas group (50.9%; P = 1.00). When stratified by visual-spatial abilities test scores, students with lower MRT scores achieved higher posttest scores in the stereoscopic 3D AR group (49.2%) as compared to the monoscopic 3D desktop group (33.4%; P = 0.015) and similar to the scores in the 2D group (46.4%; P = 0.99). Participants with higher MRT scores performed equally well in all conditions. It is instrumental to consider an aptitude-treatment interaction caused by visual-spatial abilities when designing research into 3D learning. Further research is needed to identify contributing features and the most effective way of introducing this technology into current educational programs.
© 2019 The Authors. Anatomical Sciences Education published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Anatomists.

Entities:  

Keywords:  augmented reality; gross anatomy education; mental rotation test; stereoscopic three-dimensional visualization technology; undergraduate education; visual-spatial abilities

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31887792     DOI: 10.1002/ase.1941

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anat Sci Educ        ISSN: 1935-9772            Impact factor:   5.958


  14 in total

1.  Quantifying the Impact of Signal-to-background Ratios on Surgical Discrimination of Fluorescent Lesions.

Authors:  Samaneh Azargoshasb; Imke Boekestijn; Meta Roestenberg; Gijs H KleinJan; Jos A van der Hage; Henk G van der Poel; Daphne D D Rietbergen; Matthias N van Oosterom; Fijs W B van Leeuwen
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 2.  Distance education for anatomy and surgical training - A systematic review.

Authors:  Michael Co; Kwong Yee Chloe Cheung; Wan Suen Cheung; Ho Man Fok; Ka Hey Fong; Oi Yan Kwok; Tsz Wai Kelvin Leung; Hei Chun Justin Ma; Pui Ting Isabelle Ngai; Man Kit Tsang; Cheuk Yin Matthew Wong; Kent-Man Chu
Journal:  Surgeon       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 2.632

3.  Development of a Virtual Three-Dimensional Assessment Scenario for Anatomical Education.

Authors:  Katerina Bogomolova; Amir H Sam; Adam T Misky; Chinmay M Gupte; Paul H Strutton; Thomas J Hurkxkens; Beerend P Hierck
Journal:  Anat Sci Educ       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 4.  Outcomes, Measurement Instruments, and Their Validity Evidence in Randomized Controlled Trials on Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality in Undergraduate Medical Education: Systematic Mapping Review.

Authors:  Lorainne Tudor Car; Bhone Myint Kyaw; Andrew Teo; Tatiana Erlikh Fox; Sunitha Vimalesvaran; Christian Apfelbacher; Sandra Kemp; Niels Chavannes
Journal:  JMIR Serious Games       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 3.364

Review 5.  A Systematic Review of Augmented Reality in Health Sciences: A Guide to Decision-Making in Higher Education.

Authors:  Carlos Rodríguez-Abad; Josefa-Del-Carmen Fernández-de-la-Iglesia; Alba-Elena Martínez-Santos; Raquel Rodríguez-González
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 6.  Current Perspectives on Augmented Reality in Medical Education: Applications, Affordances and Limitations.

Authors:  David Parsons; Kathryn MacCallum
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2021-01-19

7.  The Use of Mobile Devices to Enhance Engagement and Integration with Curricular Content.

Authors:  Gary B Leydon; Michael L Schwartz
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2020-08-31

Review 8.  A review of anatomy education during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: Revisiting traditional and modern methods to achieve future innovation.

Authors:  Joe Iwanaga; Marios Loukas; Aaron S Dumont; R Shane Tubbs
Journal:  Clin Anat       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 2.409

9.  Stereoscopic three-dimensional visualisation technology in anatomy learning: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Katerina Bogomolova; Beerend P Hierck; Agnes E M Looijen; Johanne N M Pilon; Hein Putter; Bruce Wainman; Steven E R Hovius; Jos A van der Hage
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 6.251

10.  The effectiveness of the use of augmented reality in anatomy education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kerem A Bölek; Guido De Jong; Dylan Henssen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-27       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.